The correct answer is Option 2. Explanation & Key Takeaways: • The Kesavananda Bharati case (1973) is one of the landmark judgments in the history of the Indian Constitution. • In this case, the Supreme Court propounded the Basic Structure Doctrine, which asserts that Parliament cannot amend the basic structure of the Constitution. • Details of the statements: • (A) The case was heard by a 13-judge bench, but it was headed by Chief Justice S.M. Sikri, not A.N. Ray. Hence, this statement is incorrect. • (B) The bench delivered its verdict in a narrow 7-6 majority, outlining the basic structure doctrine. Hence, this statement is correct. • (C) This case did change the decision of the Golaknath case (1967), which had held that Parliament could not amend fundamental rights. Kesavananda Bharati overruled this and allowed amendments but within the bounds of the basic structure. Hence, this statement is correct. • (D) The judgment is often cited as an instance of judicial activism, as it imposed limits on Parliament's power to amend the Constitution. Hence, this statement is correct. Related Concepts: • The Golaknath case (1967) had held that Parliament could not curtail or amend fundamental rights. • The Kesavananda Bharati judgment upheld Parliament's power to amend the Constitution but introduced the doctrine of the basic structure to ensure checks and balances. • Examples of the basic structure include the supremacy of the Constitution, the rule of law, judicial review, and the separation of powers.