RB News World Latest News
Related Articles
The Supreme Court on Friday heard the case on the validity of the 42nd Amendment of the Constitution. This hearing was held on the petitions of senior advocate Subramanian Swamy, Vishnu Shankar Jain and others. During the hearing, the court said that judicial review has already been done on this. The court reserved the decision on this matter and said that it will give its decision on November 25.
During the hearing, all three petitioners presented their arguments in the court and questioned the validity of making amendments during the Emergency. On this, the court said that it cannot be said that the Parliament did not have the power to amend during the Emergency or that the work done by it was meaningless.
What is the Preamble of the Constitution and the 42nd Amendment?
During the Emergency, in 1976, the Indira Gandhi government added the words socialist, secular and integrity to the Preamble under the 42nd Amendment. This amendment changed the Sovereign, Democratic Republic in the Preamble to Sovereign, Socialist, Secular, Democratic Republic. These words were not in the original form of the Constitution, so the demand for removing them has been raised from time to time.
Socialism means welfare state
During the hearing, the court said that the meaning of the word socialism may vary in different places in the world, but in India it means welfare state. This word does not hinder the development of the private sector in the country. The court also said the same about the word secularism that its meaning in India is different from other countries. Citing the 1994 SR Bommai case, the court said that it was considered part of the basic structure of the Constitution and it was also clarified.
Arguments of the petitioners
During the hearing, all three petitioners presented their arguments. Vishnu Shankar Jain said that these words were added to the preamble during the Emergency without listening to the opinion of the people. Also, since these have been added to the Constitution after the cut-off date of November 26, 1949, they do not have any validity. He requested to send the matter to a larger bench, which was rejected by the court.
Subramanian Swamy said that the only question that arises on this issue is whether we will consider it as a separate paragraph, because we cannot say that these words were adopted in 1949. He said that after accepting it, we can keep a separate paragraph below the original paragraph.
At the same time, Ashwini Upadhyay said that he is not against the concepts of socialism and secularism, but he is opposed to the inclusion of these words in the preamble. He said that since this amendment was not approved by the state, they should be removed from the preamble.
Power of amendment to Parliament
After the hearing, the court said that under Article 368 of the Constitution, Parliament has been given the power to amend the Constitution, which extends to the preamble. The court made it clear that the preamble is an integral part of the Constitution and it can be amended. The court also said that the question cannot be raised that the Lok Sabha did not have the power to amend in 1976.
