New Delhi, December 7, 2025 (Bharat Khabarnama Bureau) : A fresh legislative effort to redefine the philosophical foundations of the Indian Constitution has commenced in Parliament from the saffron party. Bhim Singh, a Bharatiya Janata Party member of the Rajya Sabha, introduced a private member’s bill in the parliament seeking the removal of the words “secular” and “socialist” from the nation’s Preamble in the Constitution. This initiative has reignited a decades old debate by the right wing outfit, challenging the legitimacy of amendments enacted during the Emergency period and probing the very character of the Republic.
The proposed bill argues that the 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1976, which inserted these two terms, represented an executive overreach during a time of suspended democratic norms. Bhim Singh contends that the foundational document, as meticulously crafted by the Constituent Assembly led by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, inherently embodied these principles. The explicit insertion, he asserts, was a politically motivated act lacking robust parliamentary scrutiny and a genuine democratic mandate during the politically turbulent Emergency from 1975 to 1977.
This perspective finds resonance among certain political and intellectual circles which have long viewed the 42nd Amendment, often called the “Mini-Constitution,” with skepticism. Right winger proponents of the bill maintain that the Constitution’s extensive provisions on fundamental rights, directive principles, and equality before the law already comprehensively guarantee social justice and religious freedom, rendering the Preamble’s specific adjectives superfluous.
However, constitutional authorities present a formidable counterpoint. They emphasize that notwithstanding its controversial origins, the 42nd Amendment has been thoroughly assimilated into India’s constitutional jurisprudence over five decades. The Supreme Court, in a series of definitive rulings, has clarified that the term “secular” expressly articulates a principle already implicit in the fabric of the document, particularly through Articles 14, 15, and 25. Any attempt to alter the Preamble now would necessitate not only a constitutional amendment with a two-thirds parliamentary majority but would also inevitably confront the rigorous test of the Basic Structure doctrine, established in the landmark Kesavananda Bharati verdict, which places core constitutional values beyond the reach of legislative alteration.
While the passage of a private member’s bill remains a rare occurrence in India’s legislative process, the proposal has catalyzed a profound national discourse. It compels a re-examination of historical political transitions and forces a contemporary conversation about the nation’s ideological trajectory, ensuring that the legacy of the Emergency and the definitive phrasing of India’s constitutional identity remain at the forefront of political deliberation.
