Which one of the following statements with regard to the Preamble to the Constitution of India is not correct?

Correct — D, the claim that the Preamble cannot be used to interpret an ambiguous provision. Courts have consistently held the opposite. In Berubari Union, 1960, the Supreme Court called the Preamble a key to open the minds of the makers and said it may be resorted to where the language of an Article is ambiguous, even while holding that the Preamble is not itself a source of power. Kesavananda Bharati, 1973, went further, treated the Preamble as part of the Constitution, and drew on its objectives in shaping the basic structure doctrine. LIC of India, 1995, restated that the Preamble is an integral part of the Constitution. What is true is the narrower proposition in option (c) — the Preamble is not enforceable on its own — and the statement in option (d) confuses that limit with a bar on using it as an interpretive aid.

• (a)The term 'Secular Democratic Republic' was not there in the Preamble originally. — Correct. The Preamble as adopted read 'Sovereign Democratic Republic'; the words 'Socialist' and 'Secular', along with 'and integrity' in the fraternity clause, were inserted by the Forty-second Amendment in 1976.
• (b)The Preamble contains the basic structure of the Constitution of India. — Defensible on the case law. Kesavananda Bharati treated the objectives declared in the Preamble as reflecting the Constitution's basic features, and later benches have repeatedly drawn on it for that purpose.
• (c)By itself, the Preamble is not enforceable in a court of law. — Correct. No one can sue on the Preamble alone; it grants no power and creates no right, which is precisely why option (d)'s further claim about interpretation does not follow.

The Preamble declares India a sovereign, socialist, secular, democratic republic and sets out the four objectives to be secured for its citizens — justice, social, economic and political; liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship; equality of status and of opportunity; and fraternity assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the nation. It is dated 26 November 1949 and draws its language from the Objectives Resolution moved by Nehru in December 1946.

The Preamble has been amended once, by the Forty-second Amendment of 1976, which added 'Socialist', 'Secular' and 'integrity'. That amendment settled a related question, since Kesavananda Bharati had already held that the Preamble is part of the Constitution and therefore amendable under Article 368, though not in a way that destroys the basic structure. The distinction to carry into the hall is between three different claims — the Preamble is part of the Constitution, the Preamble is not independently enforceable, and the Preamble is an aid to interpretation. All three are true at once, and questions of this kind are built by denying the third.

• Berubari Union, 1960 — the Preamble is a key to the minds of the makers and may be used where an Article is ambiguous.
• Kesavananda Bharati, 1973 — the Preamble is part of the Constitution and can be amended without damaging the basic structure.
• The 42nd Amendment, 1976, added 'Socialist', 'Secular' and 'and integrity'; it is the only amendment to the Preamble.
• The Preamble by itself confers no power and is not independently enforceable.
• Its language derives from the Objectives Resolution moved by Jawaharlal Nehru on 13 December 1946.

• Confusing 'not enforceable' with 'not usable in interpretation'.
• Saying the Preamble has never been amended; it was amended once, in 1976.
• Assuming the Preamble confers power on the State, which Berubari expressly denied.

A not-correct item on the legal status of the Preamble. The false option is normally an overstatement of a genuine limitation.

• practice — not a real PYQ

  The words 'Socialist' and 'Secular' were added to the Preamble by

  • (a)the 24th Amendment
  • (b)the 42nd Amendment
  • (c)the 44th Amendment
  • (d)the 52nd Amendment

  Answer(b) the 42nd Amendment, 1976 — the only amendment ever made to the Preamble.

• practice — not a real PYQ

  In which case did the Supreme Court first hold that the Preamble may be used to interpret an ambiguous provision?

  • (a)Berubari Union, 1960
  • (b)Golaknath, 1967
  • (c)Kesavananda Bharati, 1973
  • (d)Minerva Mills, 1980

  Answer(a) Berubari Union, 1960 — which called the Preamble a key to the minds of the makers.