IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
Writ Petition (Civil) No 645 of 2020
Dr Balram Singh and Others Petitioners
Versus
Union of India and Another Respondents
Dr. Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India, W.P.(C) No. 1467/2020 and
Ashwini Upadhyaya v. Union of India, MA 835/2024
Writ Petition (Civil) No 1467 of 2020
Miscellaneous Application No 835 of 2024
Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar
Abstract
The Supreme Court of India recently delivered a landmark judgment dismissing challenges to the inclusion of the terms ‘socialist’ and ‘secular’ in the Preamble of the Indian Constitution through the 42nd Amendment. This decision has significant implications for constitutional jurisprudence and reaffirms that these terms, although formally added in 1976, were inherent in the constitutional ethos from the outset. The judgment delves into the Constitution’s fundamental principles, its adaptability as a ‘living document,’ and the role of secularism and socialism in India’s democratic framework. By examining key constitutional provisions, foundational precedents, and the evolving understanding of secularism and socialism, this article provides an in-depth analysis of the judgment and its broader ramifications for Indian polity and law.
Keywords: Secularism, Socialism, Constitution Preamble, Supreme Court Judgment, 42nd Amendment
Introduction
The Constitution of India is a living document that evolves with time, reflecting the aspirations of its people. The Court stated that the Constitution must adapt to evolving societal needs and emphasized the Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution under Article 368. The judgment reflects the idea that the Constitution is dynamic, capable of incorporating changes to address the socio-political realities of its time, which implicitly supports the notion of it being a “living document.” This concept has also been reinforced in landmark cases like Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala and S.R. Bommai v. Union of India.
Also read: Amendment Procedures under Article 368 of the Indian Constitution
The Preamble, often described as the Constitution’s identity card, enshrines the core values and objectives that guide governance. The inclusion of the terms ‘socialist’ and ‘secular‘ in the Preamble through the 42nd Amendment in 1976, during the Emergency, was a watershed moment in constitutional history. These terms sparked debates about their necessity and appropriateness, given that the principles they represent were arguably inherent in the Constitution’s framework.
The recent Supreme Court judgment in Dr. Balram Singh and Others v. Union of India dismissed a challenge to this inclusion, emphasizing that the Constitution already embodied these ideals before their explicit mention in the Preamble.
The Preamble’s Evolution
The Preamble, adopted in 1949, outlines the Constitution’s core principles, including justice (social, economic, and political), liberty, equality, and fraternity. Notably, the terms ‘secular‘ and ‘socialist‘ were absent in its original form. At the time, the framers of the Constitution believed that secularism and socialism were implied in the broader framework of governance. However, their inclusion in 1976 formalized these ideals, reflecting the socio-political climate of the Emergency era. While their addition stirred controversy, the Supreme Court has clarified that these values were integral to the constitutional vision from the beginning.
Also read: Comparison of Indian and US Constitution: A Critical Analysis
Also read: Constitutional Amendments in India: Procedure and Limitations
The 42nd Amendment and Its Context
The 42nd Amendment, passed during the Emergency (1975–77), was one of the most extensive amendments to the Constitution. It introduced sweeping changes, including the insertion of the terms ‘socialist‘ and ‘secular‘ in the Preamble. Critics argued that the amendment was enacted under duress, with the Parliament functioning under extraordinary conditions. The petitioners in this case contended that these terms were retrospectively imposed on a Constitution that was adopted in 1949, without public consensus. They also argued that the amendment constrained economic and policy choices by mandating socialism and introduced an interpretation of secularism that was not debated during the framing of the Constitution.
The Supreme Court’s Judgment
The Supreme Court dismissed these challenges, reiterating that the Constitution is a dynamic document, capable of adapting to evolving societal values. The Court highlighted that the principles of secularism and socialism were always embedded in the Constitution, even if not explicitly mentioned in the Preamble until 1976. The judgment emphasized Articles 14, 15, and 16, which prohibit discrimination on religious grounds and guarantee equality and equal protection under the law, as embodying the essence of secularism[1]. Similarly, Articles 25–30 safeguard religious freedoms and the rights of minorities, while Article 44 advocates for a Uniform Civil Code, underscoring the balance between religious autonomy and societal uniformity.[2]
On socialism, the Court clarified that its inclusion in the Preamble does not mandate a rigid economic framework but underscores the State’s commitment to social and economic justice[3]. The mixed economy model adopted by India, balancing public and private sectors, aligns with this principle.
Also read: CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE PREAMBLE OF THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION
Key Constitutional Provisions and Interpretations
Secularism
The Court traced the concept of secularism to multiple provisions in the Constitution. Article 25 guarantees freedom of conscience and the right to profess, practice, and propagate religion, subject to public order and morality.[4]
Articles 26–30 protect the rights of religious denominations and minorities to manage their institutions and preserve their culture. Secularism in India, as clarified by the Court, means the State maintains neutrality towards all religions, neither favoring nor discriminating against any. This interpretation aligns with the unique Indian context, where secularism is not about the absence of religion but the equal respect for all faiths.[5]
Also read: The concept of Secularism in Indian Constitution
Also read: Embracing Diversity: The Role of Secularism in India’s Constitution
Socialism
The term “socialist,” as included in the Preamble, reflects the State’s obligation to ensure social and economic justice. While critics feared it could lead to excessive state control, the Court noted that socialism in India aligns with democratic ideals and does not preclude private enterprise[6]. It symbolizes a welfare-oriented governance approach aimed at reducing inequalities.
Also read: CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE PREAMBLE OF THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION.
Landmark Judgments Referenced
The judgment relied on several precedents to reinforce its stance:
- Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) 4 SCC 225: The Court established the basic structure doctrine, safeguarding secularism as an inviolable feature of the Constitution.[7]
- S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994) 3 SCC 1: Secularism was declared a cornerstone of India’s constitutional framework.[8]
- R.C. Poudyal v. Union of India (1994 Supp (1) SCC 324): Secularism represents the State’s commitment to equal treatment of all faiths.[9]
- M. Ismail Faruqui v. Union of India (1994) 6 SCC 360: The judgment elaborated on secularism’s wide-ranging implications in the Indian context.[10]
Conclusion
This judgment reaffirms the enduring values of secularism and socialism as cornerstones of India’s constitutional identity. By interpreting the Constitution as a living document, the Supreme Court has upheld the principles of equality, justice, and fraternity, ensuring their continued relevance in a diverse and dynamic society.
The inclusion of ‘socialist‘ and ‘secular‘ in the Preamble has enriched India’s constitutional vision, reflecting its unique ethos of unity in diversity. This decision strengthens the framework of constitutional democracy, ensuring that the core values guiding governance remain aligned with the aspirations of the people.
Click here to read the judgment
Check the pdf section for mobile users!
[1] Article 14, 15, and 16 of the Indian Constitution
[2] Articles 25–30 and 44 of the Indian Constitution
[3] Dr. Balram Singh and Others v. Union of India, 2024 INSC 893.
[4] Article 25 of the Indian Constitution.
[5] Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) 4 SCC 225.
[6] Excel Wear v. Union of India (1978) 4 SCC 224.
[7] Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) 4 SCC 225.
[8] S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994) 3 SCC 1
[9] R.C. Poudyal v. Union of India (1994 Supp (1) SCC 324).
[10] M. Ismail Faruqui v. Union of India (1994) 6 SCC 360.
