Debate over addition of ‘socialist’ and ‘secular’ to Preamble intensifies following renewed opposition

A fresh wave of debate has erupted over whether the words “Socialist” and “Secular”, added to India’s Constitution during the Emergency under the 42nd Amendment in 1976, should remain.

RSS leader Dattatreya Hosabale and others have renewed calls to reconsider these terms, but legal experts say the Supreme Court has consistently rejected such proposals.

The 42nd Amendment, passed during Indira Gandhi’s Emergency, transformed the Preamble into a “Sovereign Socialist Secular Democratic Republic” and introduced Fundamental Duties. A subsequent rollback via the 44th Amendment (1978) left these terms intact.

Several petitions filed in 2020—by Balram Singh, Subramanian Swamy, and Ashwini Upadhyay—challenged the legitimacy of those additions.

However, in November 2024, a two-judge bench led by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna dismissed them, noting that these concepts have been deeply integrated into legal and political life and don’t restrict governance under judicial scrutiny.

The legal foundation for retaining these ideals traces back to the 1973 Kesavananda Bharati case, which laid down the basic structure doctrine, protecting core constitutional principles—including secularism—from amendment.

Subsequent rulings like Minerva Mills (1980) and SR Bommai (1994) reinforced that “socialist” and “secular” principles align with constitutional values and cannot be removed as they don’t violate the Constitution’s fundamental structure.

The Supreme Court also clarified that despite being added during a controversial era, these values represent democratic ideals intended to safeguard equality and social justice—not constraints on political pluralism or economic choice .