Supreme Court Dismisses Pleas Against ‘Socialist’ and ‘Secular’ in Constitution’s Preamble

In a significant ruling on November 25, the Supreme Court of India dismissed petitions challenging the 1976 amendment that introduced the terms “socialist,” “secular,” and “integrity” into the Preamble of the Indian Constitution. The plea was filed by former Rajya Sabha MP Subramanian Swamy and advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain, who argued that these additions, made during the Emergency period under Indira Gandhi’s government, were unconstitutional.

Chief Justice of India, Sanjiv Khanna, along with Justice Sanjay Kumar, stated that the petitions did not warrant a detailed hearing. The bench emphasized that the inclusion of the terms “socialist” and “secular” through the 42nd Amendment had been judicially scrutinized and legislatively endorsed over the years. The Chief Justice remarked, “The retrospectivity arguments, if accepted, would apply to all amendments.” The Court reaffirmed Parliament’s authority under Article 368 to amend the Constitution, including its Preamble.

The petitioners argued that the amendment was made without public consultation and that it distorted the framers’ original intent. Vishnu Shankar Jain specifically criticized the extended tenure of the Lok Sabha during the Emergency, claiming it was not meant for constitutional amendments. Swamy also asserted that the addition of “socialist” and “secular” conflicted with the original intent of the Constitution.

During earlier hearings, the bench clarified that the term “socialism” in the Indian context does not align with the Western model but emphasizes equal opportunity and the equitable distribution of resources. Justice Khanna stated, “Socialism in India is about equitable distribution of resources and equality of opportunity. It does not hinder private enterprise, which thrives in our country.”

This ruling reaffirms the “secular” and “socialist” provisions as integral parts of India’s constitutional framework, reflecting the nation’s commitment to a welfare state and religious neutrality.