Jammu: Union Minister Dr Jitendra Singh on Thursday expressed agreement with RSS general secretary Dattatreya Hosabale’s recent remarks questioning the inclusion of the words “secular” and “socialist” in the Preamble of the Indian Constitution, saying there is no scope for a difference of opinion on the matter.
“I don’t think there are two opinions on this. Dattatreya ji has rightly pointed out that the words ‘secular’ and ‘socialist’ were added through the 42nd Amendment, and were not part of Dr B.R. Ambedkar’s original vision,” Singh told reporters in Jammu.
He further added:
“Dr Ambedkar produced one of the best Constitutions in the world. If these words were not part of his thinking, then one must ask—what kind of thinking led to their later inclusion?”
Singh’s comments come days after Hosabale publicly questioned the necessity and timing of inserting these terms into the Preamble, suggesting that they should be removed for not being part of the Constitution’s original draft adopted in 1950.
When asked directly about the RSS leader’s suggestion to remove the terms, Singh replied:
“I think any right-thinking citizen will endorse it, because everybody knows this was not the part of the original Constitution, which was written by Dr Ambedkar and rest of the committee… It’s not BJP versus non-BJP, it is about preserving democratic values, preserving the constitutional values.”
Taking a dig at Congress leaders—many of whom have been seen holding copies of the Constitution during protests—Singh remarked:
“Those who are flaunting the Constitution book are actually the biggest violators of the Constitution.”
Context
The terms “secular” and “socialist” were inserted into the Preamble by the 42nd Constitutional Amendment in 1976, during the Emergency period under Indira Gandhi’s rule. Since then, several political leaders and constitutional experts have debated the legitimacy and ideological motivations behind the move.
With this latest endorsement from a Union minister, the debate around restoring the Preamble to its original form has been reignited — potentially shaping future legal and political discourse.