Is PREAMBLE A PART OF CONSTITUTION?

The ‘Objective Resolution’, proposed by Pandit Nehru and passed by Constituent

Assembly, ultimately became the Preamble to the Constitution of India. The
Preamble is an introduction to the Constitution of India. It is a key to the minds of
the makers of the Constitution. The significance of the Preamble lies in the fact
that it tells us about the three things i.e., ultimate source of authority, form of
government and form of state, and the objectives to be attained.
Preamble as such is widely accepted as the quintessence or soul and spirit of a
constitution, as it embodies the fundamentals and the basic of the constitution as
well as the vision and commitment of a newly liberated nation or people after its
passing through the inevitable birth pangs of national independence from an
oppressive and colonial regime.
HISTORY:
It is interesting to know that the Preamble, though the Constitution opens with it,
was not the first to come into existence. It was the last piece of Drafting adopted
by the Constituent Assembly at the end of the first reading of the Constitution and
then seated in the beginning of the Constitution. The motion to adopt the Preamble
was moved on 17th October, 1949. Several amendments were suggested to the
Preamble but they all were negated. At the end, the President moved the motion-
“That the Preamble stands part of the Constitution.” The motion was adopted on
November 2, 1946. The Preamble was added to the Constitution.
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 objectives, which are laid down in the Preamble, are:
1. Description of Indian State as Sovereign, Socialist, Secular, Democratic
Republic. (Socialist, Secular added by 42nd Amendment, 1976).
2. Provision to all the citizens of India i.e.,
a) Justice social, economic and political
b) Liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship
c) Equality of status and opportunity
d) Fraternity assuring dignity of the individual and unity and integrity of the
nation.
Descriptions of features:-

“We, the people of India”

It is the resolve of the people if India to constitute India into Sovereign,
Democratic, Republic. From the Preamble of the Constitution it is clear that the
framers attached importance to the sovereignty of the people. The ideas reassert the
sovereignty and paramount of the people’s will over everything.
The idea of republic indicates the representative character of its sovereign
democracy. It means that the absolute power vested in the people of India under
the Constitution is to be exercised by them through their duly elected representative
in the various union and state legislatures.
Sovereignty
The word sovereign means supreme or independence. India is internally and
externally sovereign - externally free from the control of any foreign power and
internally, it has a free government which is directly elected by the people and
makes laws that govern the people. The Popular sovereignty is also one of the basic
structure of constitution of India. Hence, Citizens of India also enjoy sovereign
power to elect their representatives in elections held for parliament, state
legislature and local bodies as well. People have supreme right to make decisions on
internal as well as external matters. No external power can dictate the government
of India.
Secularism
By the 42nd Amendment, the term "Secular" was also incorporated in the Preamble.
Secularism is the basic structure of the Indian constitution. The Government
respects all religions. It does not uplift or degrade any particular religion. There is
no such thing as a state religion for India.
In the context of secularism in India, it is said that ‘India is neither religious, nor
irreligious nor antireligious.’
It implies that in India there will be no ‘State’ religion – the ‘State’ will not
support any particular religion out of public fund.
This has two implications,
a) Every individual is free to believe in, and practice, any religion he/ she belongs
to, and,
b) State will not discriminate against any individual or group on the basis of
religion.
In S.R. Bommai v. Union of India,1994 The supreme court held that “secularism
is the basic feature of the Constitution.”
In Aruna Roy v. Union of India,The Supreme Court has said that Secularism has a
positive meaning that is developing, understanding and respect towards different
religions.
Democratic
The first part of the preamble “We, the people of India” and, its last part “give to
ourselves this Constitution” clearly indicate the democratic spirit involved even in
the Constitution. India is a democratic country. The people of India elect their
governments at all levels (Union, State and local) by a system of universal adult
franchise; popularly known as "one man one vote". Every citizen of India, who is
18 years of age and above and not otherwise debarred by law, is entitled to vote.
Every citizen enjoys this right without any discrimination on the basis of caste,
creed, colour, sex, Religious intolerance or education.
Justice
Justice promises to give people what they are entitled to in terms of basic rights to
food, clothing,housing, participation in the decision-making and living with
dignity as Human Beings. The Preamble covers all these dimensions of justice –
social, economic and political. Besides, the granting of political justice is in the
form of universal adult franchise or the representative form of democracy.
Liberty
The Preamble also mentions about liberty of thought and expression. These
freedoms have been guaranteed in the Constitution through the Fundamental
Rights. Though freedom from want has not been guaranteed in the Fundamental
Rights, certain directives to the State have been mentioned in the Directive
Principles. The importance of the judiciary in India in this connection must also be
highlighted in this country. In this connection reference may be made to two
decisions of the Supreme Court viz.,
1)Govt of A.P. and others vs. P. Laxmi Devi
2)Deepak Bajaj vs. State of Maharashtra .
In these cases, the Supreme Court has emphasized the importance of liberty for
progress, and has observed that the judiciary must act as guardians of the liberties
of the people, protecting them against executive, or even legislative arbitrariness or
despotism. Liberty, Equality and Fraternity are not to be treated as separate
entities but a trinity. They form a union in that and to divorce one from the other is
to defeat the very purpose of Democracy.
Equality
Equality is considered to be the essence of modern democratic ideology. The
Constitution makers placed the ideals of equality in a place of pride in the
Preamble. All kinds of inequality based on the concept of rulers and the ruled or on
the basis of caste and gender, were to be eliminated. All citizens of India should be
treated equally and extended equal protection of law without any discrimination
based on caste, creed, birth, religion, sex etc.Similarly equality of opportunities
implies that regardless of the socio-economic situations into which one is born,
he/she will have the same chance as everybody else to develop his/ her talents and
choose means of livelihood.
Fraternity, Dignity, Unity and Integrity
In the background of India’s multi-lingual, multi-cultural and multi- religious
society and keeping in view the partition of the country, the framers of the
Constitution were very much concerned about the unity and integrity of our newly
independent country. There was a need for harmonious co-existence
among various religions, linguistic, cultural and economic groups. Inclusion of
phrases like ‘dignityof individuals’, ‘fraternity among people’ and ‘unity and
integrity of the nation’ in the Preamble highlight such a need.

How far is Preamble useful in interpreting the Constitution

The Preamble is the key to open the mind of the makers. But it does not mean that
the Preamble can override the express provisions of the Act. In Berubari’s case the
Supreme Court held that the Preamble was not a part of the Constitution and
therefore it could never be regarded as a source of any substantive powers. Such
powers are expressly granted in the body of Constitution. What is true about the
powers is equally true about the prohibitions. It has limited application and can be
resorted to where there is any ambiguity in the statute. If the terms used in the
Constitution are ambiguous or capable of two meanings in interpreting them some
assistance may be taken from the objectives enshrined in the Constitution and the
construction which fits the Preamble may be preferred.
But in Kesavananda Bharati’s case,the Supreme Court rejected the above view and
held that the Preamble is the part of Constitution. Though in any ordinary statute
not much importance is attached to the Preamble, all importance has to be attached
to the Preamble in a Constitution Statute. Silri, C.J., observed, “no authority has
been referred before us to establish the propositions that what is true
about the powers is equally true about the powers is equally true about the
prohibitions and limitations. Even from the Preamble limitations have been derived
in some cases. It seems to me that the Preamble of our Constitution is of extreme
importance and the Constitution should be read and interpreted in the light of the
grand and noble vision expressed in the Preamble.”
Can Preamble be amended under Article 368?
This question was raised for the first time before the Supreme Court in the historic
case of Kesavanada Bharati v. State of Kerala.In that case the Attorney-General
argued that by virtue of the amending power in Article 368 even the Preamble can
be amended. It was said that since the Preamble was a part of the Constitution it
could be amended like any other provisions of the Constitution. The petitioners,
however, contended that the amending power in Article 368 is limited. Preamble
creates an implied limitation on the power of amendment. The Preamble contains
the basic elements or the fundamental features of our Constitution. Consequently,
amending power cannot be used so as to destroy or damage these basic features
mentioned in the Preamble. It was urged that Preamble cannot be amended as it is
not a part of the Constitution. The Supreme Court however held that the Preamble
is a part of the Constitution and, therefore, on this point the Berubari opinion was
wrong. On the question whether the Preamble can be amended the majority held
that since the Preamble is the part of the Constitution it can be amended but
subject to this condition that the “basic feature” in the Preamble cannot be
amended. The Court said, “The edifice of our Constitution is based upon the basic
elements mentioned in the Preamble. If any of these elements are removed the
structure will not survive and it will not be same Constitution or it cannot
maintain its identity. The Preamble declares that the people of India resolved to
constitute their country into a Sovereign Democratic Republic. No one can suggest
that these words and expressions are ambiguous in any manner. An amending
power cannot be interpreted so as to confer power on the Parliament to take away
any of these fundamental and basic characteristics of policy.” It is hence contended
that this view of the court is correct. The amending power cannot change the
Constitution in such a way that it ceases to be a ‘Sovereign Democratic Republic’.
It can only be done by wrecking Constitution.
CRITIQUE AND CONCLUSION
A Preamble indicates only the general purposes for which the people ordained and
established the Constitution. It cannot and has never been regarded as the source of
any substantive power conferred on the Government or any of its departments.
Although, it is permissible to look at the Preamble for understanding the import of
various clauses contained in the bill, full effect should be given to the express
provisions of the bill, even though they appear to go beyond the terms of Preamble.
Where the language of the Act is clear, Preamble shall be disregarded. Where the
object or meaning of an enactment is vague or unclear the Preamble must be
resorted to explain it. It has been rather rightly put up in the case of Burrakur Coal
Co. Ltd. v. Union Of India that, “where very general language is used in an
enactment, which, it is clear, must be intended to have a limited application, the
Preamble must be used to indicate to what particular instances the enactment is
intended to apply”. However, it can never be a source of Power.
A Preamble provides significant help in the interpretation of the Constitution
when words actually are ambiguous. Under such circumstances it is the key to open
the minds of the makers of the Act. But if the language of the Article is sufficiently
clear, it is not to be interpreted in the light of the Preamble in preference to the
obvious meaning thereof. The objectives in the Preamble are just a part of basic
structure of the Constitution and nothing more than that. So, Preamble cannot be
amended so as to destroy the objectives,but also cannot be used as a law to judge
people on.