Law Minister: No plan to remove 'socialist', 'secular' from Preamble

The government has ruled out any plan or intention to remove the words 'socialist' and 'secular' from the Preamble of the Constitution.

In a written reply, Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal told the Rajya Sabha on Thursday that there may be discussions or debates in certain public or political circles, but "no formal decision or proposal has been announced by the government" regarding amendments to these terms.

Added to the Preamble of the Constitution during the Emergency in 1976, the two terms hit headlines last month after the then Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar asserted that these words were a "festering wound". Describing the Preamble as sacrosanct and "not changeable", Dhankhar said these words were a "sacrilege to the spirit of Sanatan".

RSS general secretary Dattatreya Hosabale had also called for a national debate on whether the terms “secular” and “socialist” to define India's foundational values should remain in the Preamble.

However, the Law Minister said, "The government's official stand is that there is no current plan or intention to reconsider or remove the words 'socialism' and 'secularism' from the Preamble of the Constitution. Any discussions regarding amendments to the Preamble would require thorough deliberation and broad consensus, but as of now, the government has not initiated any formal process to change these provisions."

Meghwal pointed out that in November 2024, the Supreme Court dismissed petitions challenging the 1976 amendment (42nd Constitutional Amendment), which affirmed that Parliament's power to amend the Constitution extends to the Preamble. The top court had clarified that "socialism" in the Indian context signified a welfare state and did not impede private sector growth, while "secularism" was integral to the Constitution's basic structure.

Meghwal said certain groups might be expressing opinions or advocating reconsideration of these words. "Such activities can create a public discourse or atmosphere around the issue, but this does not necessarily reflect the official stance or actions of the government," he clarified.