Secularism and Constitution of India

From an age long discussion secularism word have been highlighted frequently on media ,social media sites ,sometimes word secularism word from the Constitution of India is taken as the bases understanding what is correct and what is wrong happening in the country. In this article we will have a detailed study about this word (secular), who introduced it in Indian Constitution, Dr Bhim Rao Ambedkar views on secularism etc.

But before moving forward have a look on Preamble of Indian constitution which came in existence  in 1950

Preamble of Indian constitution in 1950(It doesn't have word secular in it.)

The preamble specifies the source of authority and the system of a government, the objectives to be attained by a political system and the date of the adoption and enactment of the Constitution. Though the Preamble is not enforceable in any court of law and generally, not considered a part of the Constitution, it provides a principle key understanding and interpretation of the Constitution; it has, therefore, been described as the soul of a Constitution. In case of any doubt the Supreme Court has referred to the Preamble to elucidate various aspects of the Constitution.  Now the question arises why the writer of constitution Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar didn't placed word secularism in it ,even Indian constitution give full access to practice every religion with its full freedom why DR Ambedkar do this??

  

 Dr B.R. Ambedkar was so opposed to the inclusion of word “secular” in the Constitution of India. The text of the Constituent Assembly Debates has been cited to argue that when Professor K.T. Shah proposed this inclusion of a word “secular”, Ambedkar also opposed this amendment. The politically motivated suggestion behind this development is that Ambedkar was not a supporter of a secular Constitution for India. According to him secularism can be a policy of a political party but not of a country.

The context of this word’s insertion into the Constitution is a reason enough to show it illegitimate. “Secular” was made a part of the Constitution’s Preamble by a infamous 42nd Amendment enacted during the Emergency. Then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi set up a committee in 1976 under the Chairmanship of the Minister of External Affairs of that time Swaran Singh. When most of the opposition leaders were in jail, the amendment severely curtailed the fundamental rights of Indian citizens and also imposed a number of fundamental duties upon them. Much of the 42nd Amendment has been rolled back through court verdicts and succeeding legislation in parliament, but the word secular remains in the draft.

Below is the Preamble of constitution after 42 constitution Amendment in 1976.

Now the question arises why Indira Gandhi was in so much hurry to add this word in constitution, and when the most of the influential leader of oppositions were jail no one to oppose in Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha ,the bill passed ,was it possible if this bill had a proper scrutiny in parliament if this was not an emergency?

Were this much of Government policies would have been opposed on the name of secularism??Wouldn't India have been a better place to live????

Read sensational and famous article--- Boss or Gandhi

Boss or Gandhi

Boss or Gandhi

People who are so constrained by their mental trauma to such a level that they ignore the facts and truth are not to be benefited by this article .This is a factual article without any imagination but pure truth so evaluate after reading and share your views after that......

 I wish to  actualise one of the most important and one of  the most controversial question that "who was the real hero of Indian independence".
It's been 70+ years but still we are confused about whom to give this title (if you don't have enough confusion about this matter make sure you through some history books other then NCERT).

In the present scenario a random look on Indian historians or history leaders can conclude you to the thought that it must be Gandhi as we have been told  from school days . Even i am a great fan of Gandhi his efforts for uniting the country are still unmatched till date but overrated on role of county freedom. Some of the readers must be feeling offended by my above statement. But after reading the text below they will be able to forgive me.

This startling conversation was first published by a famous Organisation, Institute of Historical Review by an author Ranjan Borra in 1982.

 Clement Attlee( British PM who had given us independence by withdrawing British rule from India) to governor of Bengal .

"My direct question to Attlee was that since Gandhi's Quit India movement had tapered off quite some time ago and in 1947 no such new compelling situation had arisen that would necessitate a hasty British departure, why did they had to leave?.

"In his reply Attlee cited several reasons for departure, the principal among them was being the erosion of loyalty to the British crown among the Indian army and Navy personnel as a result of the military activities of Netaji subhash chandra boss," Justice Chakraborthy says.

That's not all and Chakraborthy adds, "Toward the end of our discussion I asked Attlee what was the extent of Gandhi's influence upon the British decision to quit India. Hearing this question, 

Attlee's lips became twisted in a sarcastic smile as he slowly chewed out the word, m-i-n-i-m-a-l!"

The above content is a bit in understanding who was what, there are hundred of facts which have been hidden from us  or you can say were made hidden from the country just to glorify someone .The reason for this fraud could be introspective .....

You can verify your doubt by reading the following book by General GD Bakshi Boss or Gandhi

  Also read article on topic  ---Secularism and constitution of india