The Constitution of India is perhaps the most comprehensive of all constitutions. It contains 395 original articles that are divided into 22 Parts and has 12 Schedules. Articles 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 60, 324, 366, 367, 379, 380, 388, 391, 392, 393 and 394 came into force on 26 November, 1949 and other articles came into force from 26 January, 1950.
The Preamble embodies the ideals which the founding fathers of the Constitution desired to achieve by the citizen, in their best interest. The Preamble spells out its source of authority, i.e., “People of India”. It also expresses the social and political philosophy of the country and contains the nation’s concept of social justice in its widest promptings.
Preamble
“WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a SOVEREIGN SOCIALIST SECULAR DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC and to secure to all its citizens:
Justice, social, economic and political;Liberty, of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship; Equality of status and of opportunity; And to promote among them all Fraternity assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the Nation; In Our Constituent Assembly this twenty-sixth day of November, 1949, do Hereby Adopt, Enact and Give to Ourselves This Constitution.
The Preamble when analysed may be divided into three parts by reference to its qualitative characteristics. The First part is declaratory, whereby the people of India in their Constituent Assembly adopted, enacted and gave to Ourselves this Constitution, that is the Constitution of India. The second part is resolutionary, whereby the people of India solemnly resolved ‘to constitute India into a sovereign democratic republic. The third part is promissory, a commitment by the people of India to secure to all its citizens, namely, justice, liberty, equality and fraternity, accompanied by an assurance of the dignity of the individual and the unity of the nation
Is Preamble a part of the Constitution It has been a very interesting question that whether the Preamble is a part o the Constitution or not It has been discussed in two leading cases:
- Berubari case
- Kesavananda Bharti case
In Berubari Union (I), (1960) 3 SCR 250: AIR 1960 SC 845: 1961 (1) SCA 22, the Supreme Court held that no doubt the Preamble is a key to open the mind of makers, which may show the general purposes for which they made the several provisions in the Constitution but nevertheless the Preamble is not a part of the Constitution. But in the case of Kesavananda Bharti y State of Kerala, (1973) 4 SCC 225: AIR 1973 SC 1461, the Supreme Court laid down following prepositions-
- that the Preamble to the Constitution of India is a part of the Constitution;
- that the Preamble is not a source of power nor a source of limitations or prohibitions; and
- the Preamble has a significant role to play in the interpretation of statutes, also in the interpretation of provisions of the Constitution.
Sovereign
According to Cooley: “A state is sovereign when there resides within itself a supreme and absolute power, acknowledging no superior.
In N. Nagendra Rao & Co. 0 State of Andhra Pradesh, ALR 1994 SC 2563: 199,4 ALR SCW 3753; (1994) 6 SCC-205, the Supreme Court observed that “sovereign” as used in the Constitution is different from the old and archaic concept of sovereignty which has ceased to survive. Sovereignty now vests in the people of India and the United states, and both recognized that people are the basis of all sovereignty. The legislature, the executive and the judiciary have been created and constituted to serve the people.
Socialist
The word socialist was not in the Preamble as enacted by the Constituent Assembly but was inserted by the 42nd Amendment Act.
In the Constituent Assembly Nehru had stated:
I stand for socialism and, I hope, India will stand for socialism and that India will go towards the Constitution of a socialist state…
In D.S. Nakara 2 LOI, (1983) 1 SCC 305: AIR 1983 SC 130: 1983 (1) SC] 188, D.A. Desai, J. observed that-
“”Socialism is a much misunderstood word. Values determine contemporary socialism pure and simple.
But it is not necessary at this stage to go into all its ramifications. The principal aim of a socialist state is to eliminate inequality in income and status and standards of life.”
Secular
Secular is another word which was inserted in 1977 alongwith socialism. The word ‘secular’ is commonly
understood in contradiction to the word ‘religious’. The ‘secular state’ in its political context can and has assumed different meanings in different countries, depending broadly on historical and social circumstances, the political philosophy and the felt needs of a particular country. Broadly speaking, in one country, secularism may mean an actively negative attitude to all religions and religious institutions, in another country, it may mean a strict” wall of separation” between the state and religion and religious institutions. If we talk about Indian perspective, there is no official religion. India is not a theocratic state.
J. Ruma Pal has very clearly explained the philosophy behind secularism in T.M.A. Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka, (2002) 8 SCC 481: 2002 AIR SCW 4957: AIR 2003 SC 355 that although the idea of secularism may have been borrowed in the Indian Constitution from the West, it has adopted its own unique brand of secularism based on its particular history and exigencies which are far removed in many ways from secularism as it is defined and followed in European Countries, the United States of America and Australia.The Supreme Court in Valsamma Paul v Cochin University, (1996) 3 SCC 545: AIR 1996 SC 1011: 1996 AIR SCW 492, said:
“Pluralism is the keynote of Indian culture and religious tolerance is the bedrock of Indian secularism. It is based on the belief that all religions are equally good and efficacious pathways to perfection or God- realisation. It stands for a complex interpretive process in which there is a transcendence of religion and get there is a unification of multiple religions. It is a bridge between religions in a multi-religious society to cross over the barriers of their diversity… And the hallmark of the humanist and the secularist in regard to the ideals he will pursue and the means by which he will pursue them is not ‘I will be secular, I will be a humanist, only when all the “others” also conduct themselves as secularists and humanists’. Our conduct must be principles, whatever the conduct of others. ‘For,’ as Jesus said, ‘if you love those who love you what reward have you’.
Democratic
Democracy is a method of government by discussion and persuasion. The core of democracy is choice. There may be a number of ideas or lines of action proposed by different individuals or groups. These groups come together with a view to find some conclusion agreeable to all or most of the groups. Abraham Lincoln in his famous speech at gettysberg described Democracy as government of the people, by the people, for the people.
The Supreme Court in Kesavananda Bharti v State of Kerala,(1973) 4 SCC 225: AIR 1973 SC 1461, he is very rightly described the concept of democracy as visualised by the Constitution presupposes the representation of the people in Parliament and state legislature is by the method of election… It is obvious that a power must be lodged somewhere To judge the validity of the election, for, otherwise, there would be no certainty as to who were legitimately chosen as members, And any intruder or usurper Might claim a seat and thus trample upon the Privileges and liberties of the people indeed elections would be come under such circumstances a mockery.”
Republic
Prostate, in which executive head of the state is not hereditary monarch but elected representative, is called Republic. In other words, in a republic all offices including the highest, that is, that of the head of the state are open to all citizens not there is no what were citizen being elected to any public office.
Citizenship
A citizen of a given state is one who enjoy full membership of the political community of the State. Aliens, unlike citizens, do not enjoy all the fundamental rights secured to the citizens. Citizens alone have a right to vote to the Union or State Legislature and only they can become a member thereof.
Citizenship can be of following 3 types:- Citizenship by domicile (Art. 5)
- Citizenship by migration (Art. 6)
- Citizenship by registration (Art. 8)
The law relating to citizenship is now contained in the Citizenship Act, 1955. The Citizenship Act, 1955,
prescribes the following ways for acquisition of citizenship:- By birth;
- By descent;
- By registration;
- By naturalisation; and
- By incorporation of territory.
There is single citizenship for the whole of India. There is no State citizenship. A person residing in any sue of the Indian States has the same rights and privileges as his compatriot residing in another state. There is in India only one citizenship and one domicile. In U.S.A, there is deal citizenship wiz. National Citizenship and State Citizenship.
A citizen of India, who by naturalisation, registration or otherwise, voluntarily acquires a citizenship of another Country, shall cease to be an Indian citizen. A citizen may renounce his citizenship and in such case he ceases to be a citizen of India after such renunciation."State" (Article 12)
- The Government and Parliament of India,
- The Government and Legislature of a State,
- Local Authorities, and
- Other authorities;
- within the territories of India, or
- under the control of the Government of India.
The Supreme Court has laid down it extends to any action whether administrative, judicial or quasi-judicial which can be termed as state action. In Ajay Hasia v Khalid Mujib Sehravardi, AIR 1981 SC 487: (1981) I SCC (1981) 2 SCR 79 the Supreme Court summarized the criterion for judging whether a body is a state. But in Pradeep Kumar Biswas v Indian Institute of Chemical Biology, (2002) 5 SC 111, the Supreme Court formulated the whole law regarding ‘state’, and laid down following principles:
- (a) Principles laid down in Ajay Hasia v Khalid Mujib case are not a rigid set of principles;
- The question in each case will have to be considered on the basis of facts available- the body is financially, functionally or administratively dominated by or under the control of the government.
- Such control must be particular to the body in question;
- Mere regulatory control under a statute or otherwise would not sure to make a body a Part of the state.
- Regional Engineering College established by a Society registered under a State Act 2. Indian Council of Agricultural Research;
- Indian Statistical Institute;
- Steel Authority of India Limited;
- Food Corporation of India;
- Nationalised Banks;
- International Airport Authority;
- Rajasthan Electricity Board;
- Oil and Natural Gas Commission;
- Council for Indian School Certificate Examinations;
- Council of Scientific and Industrial Research;
- Uttar Pradesh Raja Karmachari Kalyan Nigam;
- Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd;
- All the Nationalised Banks;
- Bombay Port Trust;
- United India Insurance Co.
But in Zee Telefilms Ltd. o UOI, (2005) 4 SCC 649: AIR 2005 SC 2677: 2005 AIR SCW 2985, the court held that the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) is not State. In Lieutenant Governor of Delhi o V.K. Sodhi, (2007) 15 SCC 136: AIR 2007 SC 2885: 2007 AIR SCW 5268, it was held that the State Council of Education, Research and Training (SCERT) is not “State” or “other authority” within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution.