The Supreme Court on Monday said that secularism has always been held as a part of the basic structure of the Constitution, Live Law reported.

A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Sanjay Kumar made the verbal observation while hearing petitions by an individual Balram Singh, and Bharatiya Janata Party leaders Subramanian Swamy and Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, challenging the inclusion of the words “socialist” and “secular” in the Preamble to the Constitution through the 42nd amendment in 1976.

“There are a number of judgments of this court which hold that secularism was always part of the basic structure of the Constitution,” Khanna said, according to Live Law. “If one looks [at the] right to equality and word fraternity used in the Constitution as well as the rights under Part III, there is a clear indication that secular has been held as the core feature of the Constitution.”

Khanna noted that in contrast to the French model of secularism, India had embraced a distinct approach.

“You don’t want India to be secular?” Khanna asked the petitioners during the hearing.

In response, advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain, representing Singh, replied: “We are not saying that India is not secular. We are challenging this amendment.”

Jain added that BR Ambedkar, the architect of India’s Constitution, believed that the inclusion of the word “socialism” would curtail personal liberty.

“Socialism can also mean that there should be equality of opportunity and wealth of the country should be distributed equally...let’s not take the Western meaning,” Khanna responded.

Upadhyay, who is also a Supreme Court advocate, said that India has been secular for centuries.

Swamy contended that the Preamble was a declaration made on November 26, 1949, and alterations made through amendments were arbitrary. He claimed it was incorrect to suggest that the current Preamble reflects the citizens’ agreement to establish India as a socialist and secular republic on November 26, 1949.

In response, Khanna said that the words added to the Preamble through the amendment had been marked by brackets, indicating their inclusion in 1976. Terms such as “unity” and “integrity” had also been added through the same amendment, he said.

Upadhyay argued that if such an amendment was approved, it would set a precedent for future changes to the Preamble, potentially allowing the removal of terms like “democratic”.

The matter will be next heard on November 18.

Also read: Removing ‘secularism’ from the Preamble will sound democracy’s death knell: ex-SC judge KM Joseph