The 42nd Amendment and the Shift Toward Socialism: Philosophical and Legal Impacts

Published Paper PDF: Download PDF

DOI: https://doi.org/10.63345/ijrsml.v11.i12.14

Certificate: View Certificate

Anshika Agarwal¹ & Dr Vijay Kumar Singh²

¹Research Scholar

Maharaja Agrasen Himalayan Garhwal University

Uttarakhand, India

²Research Supervisor

Maharaja Agrasen Himalayan Garhwal University

Uttarakhand, India

Abstract

The 42nd Amendment to the Indian Constitution, enacted during the peak politically charged Emergency years of 1976, is the most comprehensive and controversial overhaul of the country’s constitutional order. It aimed at redefining the Indian Republic’s ideological bases by officially inserting the words “Socialist” and “Secular” in the Preamble, establishing the supremacy of the central government while circumscribing the independence of institutions like the judiciary and the state governments. While touted as an extension of India’s post-independence pledge towards social justice and fair development, the amendment also constituted a step towards a model of governance that was state-centric in character—characterized by centralized authority, ideological rigidity, and overreach within the constitutional process.

This article presents a critical examination of the philosophical underpinnings, juridical constructs, and lasting connotations of this amendment, with particular reference to its socialist dimension. Drawing on a range of sources—ranging from constitutional theory to parliamentary debates, path-breaking Supreme Court decisions (Minerva Mills, Kesavananda Bharati), and recent political philosophy—the study evaluates the manner in which the 42nd Amendment reshaped the constitutional self and democratic character of India. It examines pivotal issues such as: What political and ideological dynamics shaped the amendment-making process? How did it affect the dynamic relationship between Directive Principles and Fundamental Rights? What was the judiciary’s role in resisting or acquiescing in this ideological imposition?

By employing a qualitative and doctrinal legal approach, the study analyzes source legal documents, conducts comparative constitutional analysis, and employs thematic interpretation in reviewing the intent and implications of the amendment. Based on the findings, the amendment shifted the balance of power in favor of Parliament’s will at the cost of constitutional morality and judicial check. The article also indicates how judicial resistance through the Basic Structure Doctrine restored balance and ensured democratic resilience. The study reveals how even as the 42nd Amendment attempted to institutionalize socialism within the framework of India’s constitution, its own history is marked by contest, complication, and incompleteness. It is a reflection of the tensions that underpin constitutional pluralism and state ideology, executive aspirations and institutional limits, and short-term political goals and long-term constitutional structures. The study has significant bearing in the present context as India grapples with constitutional identity, economic policy, and democratic responsibility.

Keywords

42nd Amendment, Socialism, Indian Constitution, Preamble, Secularism, Constitutional Law, Judicial Review, Emergency, Indira Gandhi, Legal Philosophy

References

• Ahmed, F. (2020). Arbitrariness, subordination and unequal citizenship. Indian Law Review, 4(2), 121–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/24730580.2020.1737953
• Austin, G. (1999). Working a democratic constitution: The Indian experience. Oxford University Press.
• Bhatia, G. (2016). The transformative constitution: A radical biography in nine acts. HarperCollins India.
• Bhargava, R. (2010). Reimagining secularism: A normative defence of constitutional secularism. Journal of Political Philosophy, 18(3), 287–312. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9760.2009.00358.x
• Bilchitz, D., & Michelman, F. (2011). The South African Constitutional Court and socio-economic rights as “insurance swaps.” Constitutional Court Review, 4, 1–47.
• Choudhry, S. (2009). How to do comparative constitutional law in India: Some reflections. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 7(4), 552–584. https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/mop031
• Dhavan, R. (1978). Amending the Constitution: The Indian experience. Indian Journal of Political Science, 39(3), 277–308.
• Guha, R. (2007). India after Gandhi: The history of the world’s largest democracy. HarperCollins India.
• Jain, M. P. (2013). Indian constitutional law (7th ed.). LexisNexis Butterworths Wadhwa Nagpur.
• Jacobsohn, G. J. (2003). The wheel of law: India’s secularism in comparative constitutional context. Princeton University Press.
• Jayal, N. G. (2008). Representing India: Ethnic diversity and the elections of 2004. India Review, 7(3), 205–232. https://doi.org/10.1080/14736480802317250
• Khaitan, T. (2012). The basic structure doctrine: A theoretical reconciliation between constitutional supremacy and democratic supremacy. Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal, 12(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.5235/147293412802678761
• Krishnaswamy, S. (2009). Democracy and constitutionalism in India: A study of the basic structure doctrine. Oxford University Press.
• Michelman, F. (2017). Constitutional self-government re-visited: From jurisprudence to political economy. Modern Law Review, 80(1), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12237
• Noorani, A. G. (1976). The Forty-Second Amendment: A critique. Economic and Political Weekly, 11(50), 2001–2006.
• Sathe, S. P. (2002). Judicial activism in India: Transgressing paradigms. Washington University Global Studies Law Review, 1(1), 131–160.
• Seervai, H. M. (1985). Constitutional law of India (4th ed., Vols. 1–3). N. M. Tripathi.
• Sharma, B. K. (2011). Constituent power and constitutional amendment: A case study of India. National Law School of India Review, 23(1), 45–67.
• Sirohi, S. (1993). Judicial activism in India: A critical appraisal. Asian Survey, 33(7), 662–678. https://doi.org/10.2307/2645063
• Sur, P. K. (2022). The legacy of authoritarianism in a democracy: Evidence from India’s Emergency. Journal of Comparative Politics, 54(4), 569–602. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220027211061789
• Mehta, U. B. (2003). The anxiety of freedom. In Z. Hasan, E. Sridharan, & R. Sudarshan (Eds.), India’s living constitution: Ideas, practices, controversies (pp. 69-90). Permanent Black.
• Shourie, A. (2000). The courts and their judgments: Premises, prerequisites, consequences. Rupa & Co.
• Baxi, U. (1980). The crisis of the Indian legal system: Alternatives in development, law and social change. Vikas Publishing House.
• Chandhoke, N. (2014). Secularism in the Constituent Assembly debates. Economic and Political Weekly, 49(12), 47–55.
• Reddy, B. M., & Somaiah, R. (2014). Basic structure doctrine in the Indian Constitution: A critical evaluation. Journal of the Indian Law Institute, 56(1), 23–46.
• Ramaswamy, R. (2012). Constitutional socialism and judicial review: Revisiting Article 31C. Indian Journal of Constitutional Law, 6, 95–118.