A group of petitions contesting the use of the terms "socialist" and "secular" in the Preamble to the Constitution through the 42nd Constitutional Amendment in 1976 was presented in the Supreme Court today. The SC rejected these petitions.
A bench made up of Justice PV Sanjay Kumar and Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna upheld Parliament's "incontrovertible" authority to amend the Constitution under Article 368, so long as the changes do not conflict with the fundamental framework of the document.
What is SC Ruling?
The bench ruled that the Preamble's adoption date, November 26, 1949, cannot be used as grounds to invalidate amendments such as the insertion of specific terms. Chief Justice of India (CJI) clarified that the Constitution's adoption by the people does not restrict the amendment powers under Article 368. This clarification came as part of the judgment's key points, though the full judgment is still awaited.
Who Filed the Petition?
The petitions were filed by social worker Balram Singh, barrister Ashwini Upadhyay, and former BJP lawmaker Subramanian Swamy. They argued that the 42nd Amendment distorted the original intentions of the Constitution's framers. The petitioners claimed that the framers deliberately avoided using terms like "socialist" and "secular" during the Constituent Assembly debates.
Petitions Against the Amendments
The petitioners also challenged the legitimacy of the 1976 Parliament, which added these terms during the Emergency period. Singh’s lawyer, Vishnu Shankar Jain, argued that the Lok Sabha's extended term was intended for urgent needs and not for altering the Constitution. The petitioners maintained that adding these terms without public consultation went against the framers’ original intent.
SC’s Ruling on Amendment Powers
The bench dismissed the petitioners’ claims, affirming that the Preamble can be amended by Parliament under Article 368. The court noted that the 42nd Amendment has undergone extensive judicial review and has continued to receive parliamentary support over the decades.
'Socialism' in India
The court reiterated its previous stance on socialism, clarifying that in the Indian context, socialism signifies a welfare state focusing on equal opportunity and resource distribution. It emphasized that socialism in India does not hinder private enterprise, which continues to thrive in the country.
ALSO READ: Maharashtra Next CM: Devendra Fadnavis Vs. Eknath Shinde; Who Will Win the Race?
ALSO READ: India's Bid for 2036 Olympics: Which Indian City is Most Likely to Host the Olympics?
Comments
All Comments (0)
Join the conversation