The Preamble to Constitution of India

The Preamble of the Constitution of India, after 42nd Amendment, reads thus:

"WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a SOVEREIGN
SOCIALIST SECULAR DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC and to secure to all its citizens:

JUSTICE, social, economic and political;

LIBERTY of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship;

EQUALITY of status and of opportunity;

and to promote among them all

FRATERNITY assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the Nation;

IN OUR CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY this twenty-sixth day of November, 1949, do HEREBY ADOPT,
ENACT AND GIVE TO OURSELVES THIS CONSTITUTION.”

Meaning of Preamble

The word ‘Preamble’ (Latin word) means ‘to go before; introduction; introduction to important
statutes’. In all most all Acts, there is a Preamble which signifies the objects and aims for which the
Act is passed. In other words ‘Preamble’ indicates ‘the broad character of the legislation that is
enacted’. It occurs at the outset and serves as a preface to the Act. It sets out the main objectives of
the Legislation. As Constitution is also a Legislation, there is always a Preamble to the Constitution
also.

Scope or Role of Preamble in the Interpretation of Constitutional Provisions

In Golak Nath v. State of Punjab, [AIR 1967 SC 1643], it was observed that the Preamble in general
contains the ideas and

End pg - 179

aspirations of the people and the mode of realisation of the ideas and aspirations is worked out in
detail in the Constitution. It is a settled rule that the Preamble cannot be made use of to control the
enactments themselves where they are expressed in clear and unambiguous terms. It is only when
the Preamble conveys a clear and definite meaning in comparison with relatively obscure or
indefinite enacting words that the Preamble may legitimately prevail. This principle is applicable
equally while interpreting the Constitution.

In Anwar Ali v. State of West Bengal, [AIR 1952 Cal. 150], the Calcutta High Court observed that
when the words of an Act are clear in themselves, their meaning cannot be cut down or enlarged or
otherwise affected by reference to the Preamble. But when the meaning of any provision is not clear
or is doubtful or ambiguous, the Preamble may be referred to for the purpose of interpreting and
ascertaining the aim and objective of the legislation if the knowledge of such aim and objective will
remove the ambiguity of a provision.

In Berubari Union and Exchange of Enclaves, [AIR 1960 SC 845], the Court has observed that the
Preamble cannot be regarded as imposing any limitation on the power to cede parts of the national
territory and further observed that Preamble cannot control the unambiguous language of the
Articles of the Constitution.
In re President of India, [AIR 1960 SC 845], the Supreme Court observed that the Preamble can
never be regarded as the source of any substantive power conferred on the Government nor can the
Preamble be regarded as the source of any prohibitions and limitations.

In Keshavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, [AIR 1973 SC 1461], the Supreme Court observed that
the Preamble to the Constitution of India did not walk before the Constitution as it is interpreted
with regard to the Constitution of the USA but the Preamble to our Constitution is a part of our
Constitution and the founding fathers felt it necessary to incorporate in the Preamble the essential
features of the new State leaving the sovereignty to the people.

In many cases, the Courts observed that the Preamble cannot restrict or extend the meaning of the
enacting part when the language and the scope of the Act are not opened to doubt.

Pg-180

In Mohinder Pal v. State of H P.. [AIR 1995 HP 15], it was observed that the enacting part of the Act
is explicit and unambiguous, the Preamble cannot be resorted to, to control, qualify or restrict it; but
where the enacting part of the Act is ambiguous, the Preamble can be referred to explain and
elucidate it.

In Burrakur Coal Co. v. Union of India, [AIR 1961 SC 954 (957)] the Supreme Court held that while it
is permissible to look at the Preamble for understanding the import of various clauses of the Bill, full
effect should be given to the expressed provision of the Bill even though they appear to go beyond
the terms of the Preamble. Where the language of the Act is clear, the Preamble should be
disregarded. However, where the object and meaning of the Act is not clear the Preamble may be
resorted to for explanation.

No prohibitions or limitations can be imposed to the provision of the constitution in the context of
the Preamble. In Golak Nath v. State of Punjab, (AIR 1967 SC 1643), it was held that when the terms
used in the provision of the Constitution are ambiguous and capable of two meanings, the
interpretation may be made in the context of the Preamble.

Titus, while interpreting the constitutional provisions, the Preamble cannot restrict or extend the
meaning of the enacting part when the language and the scope of the Act are not opened to doubt.

Significance (or Importance) of the Preamble to the Constitution of India

1. Preamble to the Constitution is a key to open the mind of the makers and shows the general
purpose for which they made several provisions in the Constitution Every written constitution is
invariably prefaced with a Preamble which depicts the ideals, objects and purposes of the
Constitution. It sets out the main objectives which the legislation is intended to achieve. It is a sort of
introduction to the statute and in many a times very helpful to understand the policy and legislative
e intent.

2. The Preamble to the Constitution of India is not a mere preface. The Preamble in general contains
the ideas and aspirations of the people and the mode of realisation of the ideas and is worked out in
detail in the Constitution.

End Pg-181

3. Whenever a Constitution contains a Preamble, it expresses the political, religious and socio-
economic values which it envisages to promote.
4. The Preamble is a guide when the statute is vague, otherwise full effect should be given to
the express words of the enactment,

5. Preamble is a part of the Constitution and relates to its basic structure. It can be used in aid
of the Constitution, and the Constitution should be read and interpreted in the light of the broad and
noble vision expressed in the Preamble.

6. The constitution-makers gave to the Preamble 'the place of pride’. It embodies in a solemn
form all the ideals and aspirations for which the country had struggled during the British regime.

7. The Constitution of India has adopted in its Preamble, the principle of the ‘rule of law’.

8. Preamble states that it is the people of India that are the authors of the Constitution.

9. The Preamble to the Constitution can be regarded as a key to its objects and intention.

Is the Preamble Part of Constitution?

At first, the Supreme Court of India did not consider Preamble as part of Constitution. In re Berubari
Union & Exchange of Enclaves, [(1960) 3 SCR 250,281 -2] A.SC 845], it has been observed,

“…..a key to open the mind of the makers' which may show the general purposes for which they
made the several provisions in the Constitution; but nevertheless the Preamble is not a part of the
Constitution, and willingly has observed of the Preamble to the American Constitution. ‘It has never
been regarded as the source of any substantive power conferred on the Government of the United
States, or any of its Departments. Such powers embrace only those expressly granted in the body of
the Constitution and such as may be implied from those so granted”.

In Sajjan Singh v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1965, It was observed that while the Pramble was the key to
the mind of the constitution matter, it could not be regarded as part of the Constitution.

However later the Supreme Court, In Keshavananda Bharti . State of Kerala, AIR 1973, held that the
preamble is the

End-pg-182

part of Constitution by rejecting the above the above view, Hon’ble Chief Justice Sikri

has observed “... no authority has been referred before us to establish the proposition that what is
true about the power is equally true about the prohibitions and limitations. Even from the Preamble
limitations have been derived in some cases… It seems to me that Preamble of our Constitution is of
extreme importance and the Constitution should be read and interpreted in the light of the grand
and noble vision expressed in the Preamble

In SR Bommai v. Union of India, (AIR 1994 SC 1918). Hon’ble K. Ramaswamy, J., has observed, “The
Preamble of the Constitution is an integral part of the Constitution, democratic form of Government,
federal structure, integrity and unity of nation, secularism, socialism, social justice and judicial
review arc basic features of Constitution*

In Supreme Court, several judges held in different eases that the Preamble was a part of our
Constitution.

When a member suggested at the second reading of the draft Constitution that the Preamble should
be considered at the third reading; the President of the Constituent Assembly said that this could
not be done, because the Constitution as a whole had to be passed in its second reading, and the
Preamble was a part of the Constitution. After various amendments to the Preamble had been
rejected, the motion ‘‘that the Preamble do stand part of the Constitution was adopted. Hence the
Preamble is a part of Constitution.

The Purpose of the Preamble of the Constitution of India

The purpose of the Preamble of the Indian Constitution are the following:

1. It indicates the sources from which the Constitution comes.

2. It declares the nature of the state which Constitution establishes.
3. It sets out the objectives which the Constitution and the Government established
thereunder are to achieve.

1. Source of Constitution - 'We, the people'

The source from which the Constitution springs into existence is apparent from the words used i.e.,
“we, the people of India”, in our Constituent Assembly adopted, enacted and gave to themselves
“this Constitution”.

End-Pg-183

Some argue that the expression 'we, the people of India’ is a misconception as the entire population
of India was not involved in the process of making and giv ing to themselves the Constitution, h was
adopted by the Constituent Assembly only which was indirect!) elected and it was not submitted to
the people for rectification.

In Keshavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, [(1973) 4 SCC 225], Justice Mathew has observed that
the Constitution was framed by the Assembly which was elected indirectly on a limited franchise and
the Assembly did not represent the vast majority of the people of the country. At best the
Constituent Assembly could represent only 28.5 per cent of the adult population of the provinces, let
alone the population of the Native States. The Constituent Assembly derived its legal competence to
frame the Constitution from Section 8(1) of the Indian Independence Act, 1947 and the British
Parliament invested the Assembly with the power to frame the Constitution.

In words of Prof. Wheare, in his work ‘Modern Constitution (I960)’, “In India ‘the people’ enact the
Constitution 'in our Constituent Assembly’, but that Assembly was composed of representatives
elected by a minority of the people of India and the Constitution itself was never submitted to the
people directly. It is not unreal in any case to speak of ‘the people’ enacting a Constitution ‘in’ or
‘through' a Constituent Assembly? It is seldom indeed that the people are asked even to approve a
constitution ostensibly enacted in their name. v Moreover, once a Constitution is enacted, even
when it has been submitted to the people for approval, it binds thereafter not only the institutions
which it establishes, but also the people itself. They may amend the Constitution, if at all, only by the
members which the Constitution itself provides.”

It is not possible to make a Constitution directly by people in a vast country like India. Hence it is
ordained indirectly by the people of India through their representatives assembled in a sovereign
Constituent Assembly. Hence, the Preamble declared in unambiguous terms that it js the people of
India in their Constituent Assembly who have adopted, enacted and given to themselves the
Constitution. The Constitution ot India declares therefore that the source of authority under
Constitution is the People of India and there is no subordinate to any external authority*

End-Pg-184
Whether the authority of the Constitution of India is derived from the Indian Independence Act,
1947 or whether the authority is derived from the people, as recited in the Preamble is purely
academic,

It is a legal document as the Indian Independence Act, 1947 gave legal authority to the Constituent
Assembly of India to frame a Constitution for India. The assertion by some of the makers of the
Constitution that the Constitution proceeded from the people can only be taken as a rhetorical
flourish. The framers of the Constitution attached importance to the sovereignty of the people
though the Constitution was not directly voted by the people of the country.

2. Nature of the State - Sovereign Socialist Secular Democratic

Republic

The nature of the State which the Preamble of the Constitution adopted on the twenty-sixth day of
November, 1949 is a ‘Sovereign Democratic Republic’. Later by the 42nd Amendment Act, 1976
(w.e.f. 3.1.1977) two new words ‘socialist’ and ‘secular’ have been inserted into the Preamble and
now the Preamble declares that India is a Sovereign, Socialist, Secular Democratic Republic.

Sovereign

Sovereign power is that which is absolute and uncontrolled. As per Cooley, “a State is sovereign
where there resides within itself a supreme and absolute power acknowledging no superior”. The
word ‘sovereign’ means that the State has power to legislate on any subject in conformity with
constitutional limitations. The word ‘sovereign’ emphasises that India is no more dependent upon
any outside authority. Sovereignty is of two kinds - external and internal. A State is externally
sovereign when it is independent of the will of other States. India is externally sovereign because it
ceases to be a dependency of the British Empire by the passing of Indian Independence Act, 1947,
and the Sovereignty resides in the people. Internal sovereignty refers to the relation between the
State and its people and the sovereignty under the Constitution vests in the people of Republic of
India. Therefore, India is internally sovereign also. Though India is still a member of the
Commonwealth of Nations, its membership in it is not inconsistent with her independent sovereign
status. However, India’s membership of United Nations is in a way a limitation of its sovereignty.

End-Pg-185

Democratic

The term ‘democratic’ in the Preamble of the Constitution of India indicates that the Constitution
has established a form of Government which gets its authority from the will of the people.
Democracy means a Government in which the mass of the adult population has a share. Democracy
has been defined as ‘for the people, by the people, through the people’. The rulers are elected by
the people and arc responsible to them. Democracy may be direct or indirect. Direct democracy is
one in which the whole body of the people directly exercise political power, while in an indirect
democracy, the people, i.c., the electorate choose their representatives who form the Government.
The indirect democracy is called ‘representative democracy'. In Indian Constitution we have adopted
indirect or representative system of democracy. All the citizens above the age of 18 years have a
right to vote. The term ‘democracy’ in its broader sense embraces, in addition to political
democracy, also social and economic democracy. The term ‘democratic’ is used in the Preamble in
this very broad sense. It is also called as ‘Parliamentary democracy’.

Republic
A republic is a Government for the protection of the citizens against the exercise of all unjust power.
It is a Government administered by a few, as the representatives of the people and for their benefit.

A 'republic' is an independent sovereign power- in other words, a State - just as certainly and in the
same sense as a monarchy, limited or absolute; and every State is a person, an artificial person, in a
more extensive and far higher sense than an ordinary corporation.

The word ‘republic' is used in two senses: in a narrow sense, it is used in opposition to 'monarchy’. A
‘republic’ means a Government not by a single person but by a collegial organisation, more or less
numerous. In wider sense, the word ‘republic’ denotes a Government where no one holds the public
power as a proprietary right, but all the power is exercised for the common good where the
inhabitants are subjects and free citizens at the same time. Our Constitution, in its Preamble, uses
the term 'republic' in both these senses with the result that Indian citizens are subjects and free
citizens at the same time.

End-Pg-186

It is obvious that the Preamble which declared India to be a Republic could not possibly come into
force on 26th November, 1949 for India continued to be a Dominion till 26th January 1950.

Socialist

This word has been added by the 42nd Amendment of the Constitution Act, 1976. The word
‘socialist’ remains undefined. The concept of socialism as incorporated in the Preamble to the
Constitution is to eliminate inequalities in income, status and standard of life of the people of India
and it postulates a decent standard of life to the working people and provided security for life.

The word ‘socialism’ has been used in both types of constitutions — democratic and communistic.
Generally the term ‘socialism’ is related to the communist theory and it implies a system of
Government in which the means of production is wholly or partially controlled by the State. The
democratic socialism indicates the ideas of a welfare State which would prevent only the excess of
exploitation and free competition without destroying individual initiative and without detriment to
the political freedom. Hence, the Preamble combined both the words ‘socialism’ and ‘democracy’.
Democratic socialism aims to end poverty, ignorance, disease and inequality of opportunities.

The following definition proposed in 45th Amendment Bill, 1978 regarding the word ‘socialist’ was
not accepted by the Council of States.

“The expression ‘Republic’ as qualified by the expression ‘Socialist’ means a republic in which there
is freedom from all forms of exploitation, social, political and economic.”

In Excel Wear v. Union, [(1979) 1 SCR 1009], the Supreme Court held that the addition of the word
‘socialist’ in the Preamble might enable the Court to learn more and more in favour of
nationalisation and State ownership of the industry. However, as long as the private ownership of
industries was recognised, and governed an overwhelmingly large proportion of our economic
structure, the principles of socialism and social justice could not be pushed to such an extent as to
ignore completely, or to a very large extent, the interest of another section of the public — the
private owners of the undertakings.

End-pg-187

In D.S. Nakara v. Union of India, [(1983) 2 SCR 165 (83) ABC 130], the Supreme Court observed that
the words ‘socialist’ and ‘social’ are the result of mixing of Marxism and Gandhism, and particularly
leaning heavily towards Gandhian Socialism. The jurisprudents express that socialism is not a
communist socialism, it is particularly formulated according to our Nation’s need.

Secular

The word ‘secular’ which was inserted by the 42nd Amendment of Constitution Act, 1976 remained
undefined as the Council of States did not accept the 45th Amendment Bill, 1978 which proposed an
amendment of Art. 366 in which the definition of secular was given thus: “the expression ‘Republic’
as qualified by the expression ‘secular’ means a republic in which there is equal respect for all
religions”

The word ‘secular’ was inserted in Preamble as the Constitution of India stands for a secular State.
The State has no official religion. Secularism pervades its provisions which give full opportunity to all
persons to profess, practise, propagate religion of the choice. The Constitution not only guarantees a
person’s freedom of religion and conscience, but also ensures freedom for one who has no religion,
and it scrupulously restrains the State from making any discrimination on grounds of religion. A
single citizenship is assured to all persons irrespective of their religion.

The word ‘secular’ may be opposed to ‘religions’ in the sense that a secular State can be an anti-
religious State. In this sense the Constitution of India is not secular, because the right to the freedom
of religion is a guaranteed fundamental right. The word ‘secular’ may mean that as far as the State is
concerned, it does not support any religion out of public funds, nor does it penalise the profession
and practice of any religion or the right to manage religious institutions as provided in the
Constitution.

In the Webster’s Dictionary, ‘secular’ is defined as a ‘view of life, or of any particular matter based
on the premise that religious considerations should be ignored or proposedly excluded or as a
system of social ethics based upon the doctrine that ethical standards and conduct be determined
exclusively without reference to religion. It >s the rational approach to life and it refuses to give plea
for religion’

End-188

The founding fathers of Constitution were for secular idealism as secularism is the spirit that
permeates the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Secularism means not only a bundle of
guarantee in respect of freedom of religion and conscience and in respect c cultural and educational
rights, but a sense of basic fraternity. Thu secularism is a good as well as process. Hence, the word
‘secular has been inserted by 44th Amendment Act, 1976 in Preamble as i was always implicit in our
Constitution.

In M.P. Gopalakrishnan Nair and another v. State of Kerala and others, [AIR 2005 SC 3053], it was
held that secularism does not mean atheist society.

3. The Aims and Objectives of the Indian Constitution as Set out in the Preamble

The following are the four objectives which the Preamble secures to every citizen:

i) Justice - Social, Economic and Political

The first object of the Constitution of India as per its Preamble is justice, social, economic and
political.
Justice is the harmonious blending of selfish nature of man and > the good of the society. The
attainment of the collective good as distinguished from individual good is the main aim of rendering
justice. If the justice prevails in India, all communities live in perfect harmony.

The Preamble intends that justice must be provided to every citizen irrespective of poverty, richness,
caste, religion, sex, power, political power etc. The Preamble provides not only for justice but for
legal, economic and social justice. It requires abolition of all sorts of inequalities which result from
inequalities of wealth and opportunity, race, caste and religion. Social justice enables the Courts to
uphold legislation- (a) to remove economic inequalities; (b) to provide a decent standard of living to
the working people; (c) to protect the interests of the weaker sections of the society.

The only one of the four objectives which is directly incorporated in any Article is ‘justice, social,
economic and political’, for

End Pg-189

Article 38 provides: “(1) The State shall strive to promote the welfare of the people by securing and
protecting as effectively as it may a social order in which justice, social, economic and political, shall
inform all the institutions of the national life.”

In Research Centre v. Union of India, [AIR 1995 SC 922), Supreme Court observed:

“The Preamble and Article 38 of the Constitution of India - the supreme law, envisions social justice
as its arch to ensure life to be meaningful and livable with human dignity. The Constitution
commands justice, liberty, equality and fraternity as supreme values to usher in egalitarian social,
economic and political democracy. Social justice, equality and dignity of persons are comer stones of
social democracy. The concept ‘social justice’ which the Constitution of India engrafted consists of
diverse principles essential for the orderly growth and development of personality of every citizen.
‘Social justice’ is thus an integral part of justice in generic sense. Justice is the genus, of which social
justice is one of its species.”

ii) Liberty - of Thought, Expression, Belief, Faith and Worship

The Constitution regards the liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship, to be essential
to the development of the individual and the nation and it promises to secure the same in the
Preamble. The objective of liberty in its absoluteness means different things to different men, and it
not reflected in any Article of our Constitution. The words ‘liberty, equality and fraternity ’ were the
watch words of the French Revolution. If they are to retain their power to move men’s hearts and to
stir them to action, the words must be used absolutely - as they are used in the Preamble. Articles 19
and 25 of the Constitution considers the liberty mentioned in the Preamble.

iii) Equality of Status and of Opportunity and to Promote them among All

The third objective of the Preamble is not equality generally but equality of status and opportunity.
This object is secured by making

End pg-190

provisions in the Constitution itself as all discriminations by the State between citizen and citizen
merely on the ground of sex, religion, race, caste or place of birth have been made illegal; the public
offices have been thrown open to all citizens; untouchability has been abolished; titles of honour
stand abolished, the equality before the law and equal protections of law have been guaranteed as
justiciable rights. However, the right of equality is provided not as absolute equality but subject to
rational discrimination, for example as provided in Article 16. Articles 14, 15,16, 17 and 18 of the
Constitution of India provide ‘right to equality to every citizen’.

iv) Fraternity Assuring the Dignity of the Individual and the Unity and Integrity of the Nation

Democracy is based upon the principle of brotherhood irrespective of the race, religion, language,
culture, sex etc. This object was inserted in the Article 1 of ‘Declaration of Human Rights’ of United
Nations Organisation.

The phrase ‘Unity and Integrity of the Nation’ was substituted for “Unity of the Nation’ by the 42nd
Amendment Act, 1976 (w.e.f. 3.1.1977).

‘Fraternity’ as an object is not reflected in any Article of the Constitution as no law can produce
brotherly feeling or concord. There are provisions of the Constitution which are designated to
promote fraternity, such as a common citizenship (Art. 5) and the right to move freely throughout
the territory of India, to reside and settle in any part of India, to practise any profession, or to carry
on any occupation, trade or calling in any part of India [Art. 19]. This fourth object of fraternity refers
to a moral and political ideal and there are no provisions of the Constitution to give a clear content
to fraternity.

These four objectives - justice, liberty, equality and fraternity set out in the preamble are themselves
ambiguous and they cannot throw any light on the provisions of the Constitution. However these
objectives indicated in preamble represent the true spirit oi our Constitution.

End pg -191

Can Preamble be Amended Under Article 368?

Article 368 deals with the power of Parliament to amend the Constitution and procedure therefor. It
confers power on Parliament to amend the Constitution. Article 368(1) of the Constitution of India
provides, “Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, Parliament may in exercise of its
constituent power amend by way of addition, variation or repeal any provision of this Constitution in
accordance with the procedure laid down in this Article”.

In re Berubari Union and Exchange of Enclaves, [AIR 1960 SC 845], the Supreme Court held that the
Preamble is not a part of the Constitution. Article 368 empowers the Parliament to amend the
Constitution only. Hence the Preamble is not amendable.

The question whether the Preamble can be amended was raised for the first time before the
Supreme Court in the historic case of Keshavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, [AIR 1973 SC 1461].
It was argued on behalf of the State that by virtue of the amending power in Article 368 even the
Preamble can be varied, altered or repealed. It was argued that since the Preamble is a part of the
Constitution it can be amended like any other provision of the Constitution. The petitioners
contended that the amending power in Article 368 is limited. Preamble creates an implied limitation
on the power of amendment. The Preamble contains the basic elements or the fundamental
features of our Constitution. Consequently, amending power cannot be used so as to destroy or
damage these basic features mentioned in the Preamble. It was urged that Preamble cannot be
amended as it is not a part of Constitution.

It was held that since the Preamble is the part of the Constitution it can be amended but subject to
the condition that the ‘basic features’ in the Preamble cannot be amended.
The Court observed, “The edifice of our Constitution is based upon the basic elements mentioned in
the Preamble. If any of these elements are removed the structure will not survive and it will not be .
the same Constitution or it cannot maintain its identity. The Preamble declared that the people of
India resolved to constitute their country into a Sovereign Democratic Republic. No one can suggest
that these

End pg – 192

words and expressions are ambiguous in any manner. An amending power cannot be interpreted so
as to confer power on the Parliament to take away of these fundamental and basic characteristics of
policy”.

Preamble and the 42nd Amendment

The 42nd Amendment Act, 1976 inserted three new words, namely - ‘socialist’, ‘secular’ and
‘integrity’. These concepts were already implicit in the Constitution. The amendment merely spells
out clearly these concepts in the Preamble. Thereafter, no cases have been filed by political parties
questioning the inclusion of these words.

‘Socialism’ was already incorporated in the Directive Principles of the Constitution. The term
‘economic justice’ in the Preamble carried the meaning of socialism. The Directive Principles,
particularly Article 39(b) and (c) of the Constitution are characters of social and economic liberties of
people.

‘Secularism’ means a state which does not recognise any religion as a State religion. It treats all
religions equally. As Articles 25 to 28

of the Constitution provide ‘liberty of belief, faith and worship,

the concept of secularism was already implicit in the Constitution.

In St. Xavier College v. State of Gujarat, [AIR 1974 SC 1389], the Supreme Court held, “although the
words ‘secular State are not expressly mentioned in the Constitution but there can be no doubt that
Constitution-makers wanted to establish such a State and accordingly, Articles 25 to 28 have been
included in the Constitution.

The word ‘integrity' is intended to put an end to separatist tendencies and make people feel that
every part of India is their home. Though there is freedom of speech was guaranteed under Article
20, the State has power to impose reasonable restriction on the freedom of speech and expression
of citizens in the interests of integrity and sovereignty of India which was envisaged in Article 1 of
the Constitution.

‘The Good Governance India Foundation’ challenged the validity of Section 2 of the Constitution
(42nd Amendment) Act by virtue of which the word ‘socialist’ was inserted in the Preamble to the
Constitution. It also challenged the validity' of Section 29A(5) of the Representation of the People
Act, which was inserted by way of

End pg -193

Section 6 of the Representation of the People (Amendment) Act, 1989 making it incumbent upon
every political party registered in India to pledge allegiance to the socialist ideal failing which such a
party would be rejected from registration. It was argued that the 42nd Amendment evolved in the
climate of national Emergency, violating the basic structure of the Constitution. It was argued that
Dr. Ambedkar had opposed the inclusion of word ‘socialist’ in the Constitution.
The writ petitioner requested the Court to go into the question whether the powers under Article
368 to amend the provisions would include the power to amend even the Preamble. The petitioners
further contended that the 42nd Amendment altered the Preamble, which was impermissible as it
contained the ideas and aspirations or the objects which the Constitution-makers intended to be
realised by its enacting provisions. It is argued that such an insertion was wholly inconsistent with
the phrase ‘liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship’ in the Preamble itself.

The petitioner, further submitted that the 42nd Amendment attempted to create a particular
ideological basis for adherence to the Constitution which was against the principles of a multi-party
democracy and which breached the unity and integrity of the nation. The integration of the socialist
principle was antithetical to the principle of democracy, which was considered a basic structure of
the Constitution.

Justice S.H. Kapadia, one of the three-Judge Bench told the senior counsel Fali S. Nariman that so far
no political party had challenged this and every one had subscribed to it and the court would
consider it when the commission faced challenge from any political party.

The issues raised by the petitioners were not settled as the Supreme Court, on 12th July, 2010,
dismissed the writ petition as it was withdrawn [The Hindu, 13.7.2010].

However, the addition of three words - socialist, secular and integrity in Preamble does not amend
the basic structure of the Preamble but strengthens the implied concepts of the Constitution of India
explicitly highlights the ‘basic features of Indian Constitution’-