SC upholds 'secular,' 'Socialist' in Indian constitution's preamble

The Supreme Court of India on Monday dismissed petitions seeking the removal of the words "secular" and "socialist" from the Preamble of the Constitution. A bench led by Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar ruled against revisiting the 44-year-old constitutional amendment.

"We find no valid cause or justification for challenging this amendment after so many decades. The constitutional position is clear, and there is no need for an academic exercise on this matter," the bench stated, rejecting the writ petitions.

Petitions Filed Decades After the Amendment

The petitions, filed in 2020, argued against the inclusion of "socialist" and "secular" through the 42nd Constitutional Amendment in 1976. Petitioners contended that these terms were absent in the original Preamble adopted in 1949, claiming their inclusion limits economic policy options and imposes specific ideologies.

The court highlighted the significant delay in filing the petitions, stating that these words have gained wide acceptance over time. "The terms 'secular' and 'socialist' are well understood by 'We, the people of India.' Their addition has not hindered legislations or policies, as long as they adhere to fundamental rights and the Constitution's basic structure," the court remarked.

Court Upholds Constitution's Amendment Power

The bench reaffirmed Parliament’s authority under Article 368 to amend the Constitution, regardless of its adoption date. It dismissed arguments that the retrospective nature of the amendment rendered it invalid. The court also addressed claims that the amendment, enacted during the Emergency, should be overturned.

The bench clarified that "secularism" denotes equal respect for all religions, while "socialism" reflects a commitment to eradicating exploitation in all forms. It cited the 9-Judge Bench decision in Property Owners Association v. State of Maharashtra, affirming the flexibility of economic governance structures under the Constitution.

Arguments from Petitioners

BJP leader Subramanian Swamy and other petitioners argued that the framers of the Constitution deliberately excluded these terms to avoid imposing specific political ideologies. Swamy claimed the amendment violated the basic structure doctrine established in the Kesavananda Bharati case, which restricts Parliament from altering the Constitution's essential features.

Despite these arguments, the court reiterated that secularism and socialism are integral to the Constitution's framework and dismissed the petitions.