‘Socialism’ Reflects Goal Of Economic & Social Upliftment, Doesn’t Restrict Fundamental Right To Business & Trade Under Article 19(1)(g): SC

The Apex Court made such observations while dismissing the Petition challenging insertion ofthe words ‘socialist’ and ‘secular’ in the Preamble to the Constitution of India by the Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act in 1976.

The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna & Justice Sanjay Kumar said, “The fact that the writ petitions were filed in 2020, forty-four years after the words ‘socialist’ and ‘secular’ became integral to the Preamble, makes the prayers particularly questionable. This stems from the fact that these terms have achieved widespread acceptance, with their meanings understood by “We, the people of India” without any semblance of doubt. The additions to the Preamble have not restricted or impeded legislations or policies pursued by elected governments, provided such actions did not infringe upon fundamental and constitutional rights or the basic structure of the Constitution.”

Senior Advocate Gopal Shankarnarayanan represented the Petitioner while AOR Prateek Kumar represented the Respondent.

The Apex Court was considering the writ petitions challenging the insertion of the words ‘socialist’ and ‘secular’ in the Preamble to the Constitution of India by the Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act in 1976. The challenge was made on the grounds of retrospectivity of the insertion in 1976, resulting in falsity as the Constitution was adopted on November 26, 1949. It was contended that the word ‘secular’ was deliberately eschewed by the Constituent Assembly, and the word ‘socialist’ fetters and restricts the economic policy choice vesting in the elected government.

At the outset, the Bench explained that the two expressions—'secular' and 'socialist' and the word 'integrity' were inserted in the Preamble vide the Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976. These amendments were made in 1976. Noting that Article 368 of the Constitution permits amendment of the Constitution, the Bench said, “The date of adoption will not curtail or restrict the power under Article 368 of the Constitution.”

“While it is true that the Constituent Assembly had not agreed to include the words 'socialist' and 'secular' in the Preamble, the Constitution is a living document, as noticed above with power given to the Parliament to amend it in terms of and in accord with Article 368”, the Bench said.

Throwing light on the concept of Socialism, the Bench said, “In the Indian framework, socialism embodies the principle of economic and social justice, wherein the State ensures that no citizen is disadvantaged due to economic or social circumstances. The word ‘socialism’ reflects the goal of economic and social upliftment and does not restrict private entrepreneurship and the right to business and trade, a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(g).”

Thus, finding no legitimate cause or justification for challenging this constitutional amendment after nearly 44 years, the Bench dismissed the Writ Petitions.

Cause Title: Balram Singh v. Union Of India & Ors. [Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 893]

Appearance:

Petitioner: Sr. Adv. Gopal Shankarnarayanan, Advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, AOR Ashwani Kumar Dubey, Advocates Shourya Das Gupta, Tanya Shrivastava, Shreya Nair,AOR Vishnu Shankar Jain, Advocates Hari Shankar Jain, Parth Yadav, Mani Munjal, Marbiang Khongwir

Respondent: AOR Prateek Kumar,Advocate Ruchir Ranjan Rai, AOR Alakh Alok Srivastava, Advocate Rishabh Bafna,Sr. Adv. Dr. G.V.rao, AOR Bijan Kumar Ghosh, Advocate Ujjwal Banerjee, AOR Chand Qureshi, Advocates Santi Ranjan, Rahul Mohod, Sanjay Gyan, Vijay Kumar, Chandan Kumar Mandal, Rochak Kharbanda, Dr. O.P.Kharbanda, Abid Ali Beeran, AOR Sriram P., Advocates Vishnu Shankar, Mr. Aditya Santosh, Isha Singh, Anjali Singh, Nalukettil A S Nair, Maneesha Sunil,S Anbukrishnan

Click here to read/ download Order