Free Courses Sale ends Soon, Get It Now
Free Courses Sale ends Soon, Get It Now
Copyright infringement not intended
Picture Courtesy: https://epaper.thehindu.com/ccidist-ws/th/th_international/issues/109209/OPS/GBCDJS5CR.1+GMKDKUFRE.1.html
A Supreme Court Division Bench led by the Chief Justice of India dismissed petitions challenging the inclusion of the words 'socialist' and 'secular' in the Preamble of the Constitution.
The original Preamble of the Constitution was adopted on November 26, 1949, declared India a "sovereign, democratic republic." It did not include the terms "socialist" or "secular."
The framers of the Constitution believed that the country's economic ideals should not be fixed in the Preamble but could evolve over time.
The concept of secularism was also excluded because it was believed that Indian secularism differed from Western secularism.
The 42nd Constitutional Amendment act during the 1976 Emergency included the words "socialist," "secular," and "integrity" in the Preamble to reflect the state's economic and social policies, and to highlight the commitment to secularism.
This change was preserved in subsequent constitutional amendments, including the 44th Amendment in 1978.
In the Berubari Union Case (1960), the Supreme Court ruled that, while the Preamble is important for understanding the minds of the Constitution's framers, it cannot be considered a part of the Constitution itself.
In the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973), the Court reversed its previous position, stating that the Preamble is part of the Constitution and should be interpreted in light of the vision it represents. The Court also confirmed that the Preamble is subject to constitutional amendment, however, that should not violate the basic structure of the Constitution.
In Randhir Singh v/s Union of India (1982), the Supreme Court utilised the Preamble to interpret Article 39(d) of the Constitution, which requires equal pay for equal work. The case highlighted the value of the preamble to interpret the constitutional provisions.
In the L.I.C. of India v/s Consumer Education & Research case (1995), the Supreme Court reaffirmed that the Preamble is an essential part of the Constitution.
Former Rajya Sabha MP Subramanian Swamy, advocate Ashwini Upadhyay, and others filed the current case, challenging the use of the terms "socialist" and "secular" in the Preamble.
They claimed that these terms were added during the Emergency, and that Parliament could not change the original Preamble adopted by the Constituent Assembly. They also argued that these terms should be placed in a separate paragraph rather than in the Preamble.
The Supreme Court rejected the petitions and upheld the inclusion of the words "socialist" and "secular" in the Preamble. The Court stated that these terms are fundamental to the Constitution's structure.
The Court noted that the Constitution is a "living document" and the power to amend it extends to the Preamble.
The Court explained that the term "socialism" in India refers to a welfare state that provides equality of opportunity while allowing private enterprise, and that India's version of secularism means that the state neither supports nor opposes any religion, but treats all faiths equally.
The Supreme Court decision strengthened the basic principles of socialism and secularism, the court upholds these values as they highlight the doctrines which are fundamental to the Constitutional structure.
Must Read Articles:
Source:
|
PRACTICE QUESTION Q.Critically analyze the historical evolution of the Preamble to the Indian Constitution. (150 words) |
© 2024 iasgyan. All right reserved
