NEW DELHI: Delhi-based advocate Ashwini Upadhyay has filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court of India, seeking the removal of the words “Socialism” and “Secularism” from the Preamble of the Constitution. The petitioner argues that their insertion during the Emergency in 1976 through the 42nd Amendment Act was unconstitutional and violated the original intent of the framers of the Constitution.
Upadhyay’s plea claims that the Preamble is an unalterable historical document, adopted by the Constituent Assembly on November 26, 1949, and modifying it retrospectively undermines its authenticity. He further argues that the amendment was carried out without the ratification of the states and by a Constituent Assembly that no longer existed in 1976.
ALSO READ: Rohit Sharma, Ritika Sajdeh officially welcome second child
“The Parliament has the power to amend the Constitution but cannot alter the historical facts of the Preamble,” Upadhyay asserted in his submission, adding that any changes to the Preamble must reflect the “will of the people” through state ratifications.
Quoting debates in the Constituent Assembly and citing the landmark Kesavananda Bharati judgment, the petitioner emphasized the symbolic and historical importance of the Preamble as a reflection of India’s foundational values. He also raised concerns about the insertion of subjective terms like “Socialism,” which he argued may not align with the country’s evolving democratic aspirations.
ALSO READ: Vivek Ramaswamy, Elon Musk aim to reshape government with Founders’ vision
Key Arguments Presented:
- The words “Socialist” and “Secular” were inserted during the Emergency without due democratic process and do not reflect the will of the people.
- The Preamble, as a legacy of the Constituent Assembly, should remain unchanged to preserve its historical sanctity.
- The addition of “Secular” has not translated into uniform laws for all citizens, as religious laws still govern many aspects of life.
- The inclusion of “Socialist” contradicts the nation’s economic leaning toward capitalism, making the insertion ineffective in practice.
Upadhyay concluded that the Preamble’s essence must remain intact, even as amendments to the Constitution adapt to changing times. The Supreme Court is yet to list the petition for hearing.