Source: Supreme Court  

Why in News? 

The Supreme Court clarified that the term 'socialist' in the Constitution's Preamble reflects a commitment to being a welfare state and ensuring equality of opportunity, without mandating specific economic policies. The Court observed India's mixed economy model, where public and private sectors coexist, benefiting marginalized communities. 

• CJI Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar held in Balram Singh v. Union of India. 
• This observation came while dismissing petitions challenging the inclusion of "socialist" and "secular" in the Preamble through the 42nd Amendment Act, 1976. 

What was the Background of Balram Singh v. Union of India Case? 

• In 2020, multiple writ petitions were filed challenging the insertion of words "socialist" and "secular" in the Constitution's Preamble through the 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1976. 
• The petitioners argued that these terms were added during the Emergency period without genuine public consultation when the normal parliamentary tenure had already ended. 
• A key contention was that the Constituent Assembly had deliberately eschewed these terms during the original drafting of the Constitution in 1949. 
• The petitioners claimed that the retrospective insertion of these ideological terms 27 years after the Constitution's adoption was procedurally improper. 
• They specifically argued that the term "socialist" unnecessarily restricts the economic policy choices of democratically elected governments. 
• The challenge questioned whether an amendment made during the Emergency could fundamentally alter the Constitution's philosophical framework. 
• The legal petition states that the Constituent Assembly had intentionally not included these terms in the original Preamble, suggesting their subsequent insertion was inappropriate. 
• Notably, the petitioners filed their challenge 44 years after the actual amendment, which itself became a point of judicial scrutiny. 
• The core legal question was whether the Parliament had the constitutional authority to unilaterally modify the Preamble's foundational principles through an amendment during an extraordinary political period. 

What were the Petitioner’s Arguments in relation to 42nd Amendment's Insertions into the Preamble? 

• The 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1976 inserted three new words - "secular", "socialist", and "integrity" - into the Preamble of the Indian Constitution. 
• This amendment was made decades after the original adoption of the Constitution in 1949, where the Constituent Assembly had deliberately chosen not to include the terms "secular" and "socialist" in the Preamble. 
• The petitioners argued that the retrospective addition of these ideological terms in 1976 was procedurally improper, as it fundamentally altered the philosophical framework envisioned by the framers of the Constitution. 
• Specifically, the inclusion of "secular" was challenged, as the Constituent Assembly had previously avoided this term, with some scholars interpreting it as being opposed to religion. 
• Similarly, the term "socialist" was contested by the petitioners, who claimed it unduly restricted the economic policy choices of democratically elected governments. 
• The third term inserted was "integrity", which was meant to put an end to any secessionist tendencies and reinforce the idea of India as a "Union of States" as per Article 1 of the Constitution. 
• The petitioners contended that these amendments, made during the Emergency period, lacked genuine public consent and consultation, as they were passed after the normal tenure of the Lok Sabha had ended. 
• Overall, the central legal challenge revolved around the validity of unilaterally modifying the Preamble's foundational principles through a constitutional amendment, especially during an extraordinary political period like the Emergency. 

What were the Court’s Observations? 

• The Supreme Court reaffirmed that the Constitution is a living document, with Parliament possessing legitimate amendment powers under Article 368, which extends to modifying the Preamble. 
• The Court explicitly clarified that "socialism" should not be interpreted as a restrictive economic ideology, but rather as the State's commitment to welfare and ensuring equality of opportunity. 
• Regarding "secularism", the Court elaborated that it represents the nation's fundamental commitment to treating all persons equally, irrespective of religious affiliations, without supporting or penalizing any specific faith. 
• The Court noted that the Indian framework of socialism embodies economic and social justice principles, ensuring no citizen is disadvantaged due to economic or social circumstances. 
• The judiciary emphasized that neither the Constitution nor the Preamble mandates a specific economic policy structure, whether left or right-oriented, but represents a broader commitment to social welfare. 
• The Court highlighted that India has consistently embraced a mixed economic model, where private entrepreneurship coexists with public sector initiatives, contributing to societal upliftment. 
• The judgment observed that the constitutional provisions, particularly Articles 14, 15, 16, 25, and 26, inherently reflect secular principles of non-discrimination and religious freedom. 
• The Supreme Court observed that the late filing of these petitions - 44 years after the amendment - significantly undermines their credibility and suggests widespread public acceptance of these constitutional changes. 
• Ultimately, the Court rejected all arguments challenging the 42nd Amendment, affirming that the insertions of "socialist" and "secular" were valid constitutional modifications that did not infringe upon fundamental rights or the basic constitutional structure. 

What is Socialism" in the Indian Constitution? 

• The term "socialism" in the Indian Constitution should not be interpreted as a restrictive economic ideology imposed on the elected government. 
• Rather, "socialism" denotes the State's commitment to being a welfare state and ensuring equality of opportunity for all citizens. 
• India has consistently embraced a mixed economy model, where the private sector has flourished and coexisted alongside the public sector. 
• In the Indian context, "socialism" embodies the principles of economic and social justice, ensuring that no citizen is disadvantaged due to their economic or social circumstances. 
• The term "socialism" reflects the goal of economic and social upliftment of the marginalized and underprivileged sections of society. 
• Importantly, "socialism" does not restrict private entrepreneurship or the fundamental right to carry on any business or trade under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. 
• The court emphasized that neither the Constitution nor the Preamble mandates a specific left or right-leaning economic policy structure for the elected government. 
• The insertion of "socialist" in the Preamble represents the State's broader commitment to the welfare of its citizens and the elimination of all forms of exploitation, be it social, economic, or political. 

What is Article 368 of the Indian Constitution?