Insertion of the words "socialist" and "secular" in the Preamble of the Constitution of India by the Constitution (42nd Amendment) Act, 1976, does not violate the basic structure of the Constitution.

Supreme Court in Dr. Balram Singh v. Union of India upheld validity of "Socialist" and "Secular" terms in Constitution Preamble. Apex Court dismisses petition challenging the forty-second amendment, reinforcing basic structure doctrine

In this ruling, the Supreme Court upheld the validity of the insertion of the words "socialist" and "secular" in the Preamble to the Constitution, dismissing writ petitions challenging the Forty-second Amendment Act of 1976. The judgment, delivered by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar, reinforces the constitutional ethos of secularism and socialism, affirming their roles as integral to the basic structure of the Constitution.

The petitioners had argued that the inclusion of these terms was retrospective and invalid, as they were added after the Constitution's adoption in 1949. They contended that the Constituent Assembly had deliberately excluded these words and that their inclusion fetters economic policy choices of elected governments. Additionally, the petitioners questioned the legitimacy of the amendment, enacted during the Emergency period, claiming it lacked the people's mandate.

The Supreme Court, however, found these arguments to be untenable. The court underscored that Article 368 of the Constitution grants Parliament the power to amend the Constitution, including the Preamble. It emphasized that amendments can be challenged only on grounds of violating the basic structure of the Constitution, which in this case was not proven. The court noted that secularism and socialism are inherent in the constitutional scheme, ensuring equal treatment of all religions and advocating economic and social justice.

The judgment elaborated that secularism in the Indian context is about equal respect for all religions, prohibiting discrimination on religious grounds, as enshrined in Articles 14, 15, and 16 of the Constitution. The court highlighted that socialism does not impose a rigid economic model but signifies the State's commitment to being a welfare state, ensuring equality of opportunity and social upliftment.

The Supreme Court also dismissed the argument that the amendment's enactment during the Emergency period was unconstitutional. It referred to previous parliamentary deliberations and widespread acceptance of these terms over the years, negating the need for judicial review after 44 years.

This decision reaffirms the Supreme Court's stance on the basic structure doctrine, previously upheld in landmark cases like Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala and S R Bommai v. Union of India. The judgment emphasizes that the additions to the Preamble do not impede private enterprise or policy choices of elected governments, as long as they align with constitutional rights and principles.

With this ruling, the Supreme Court has once again clarified the constitutional position, asserting the enduring relevance of secularism and socialism in India's democratic fabric. The petitions were dismissed without merit, marking a significant endorsement of the Forty-second Amendment's validity.

Statutory provisions Articles 14, 15, 16, 25, 29, 30, and 368 of the Constitution of India, 1950; Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976.

 Dr. Balram Singh v. Union of India (SC) : Law Finder Doc id # 2667511