Page 120 - Constitution

70 Years of Indian Years of Indian

Constitution
Constitution

A Constitution must be the vehicle of the
he Supreme Court has held this preface to constitute
the founding faith or the blueprint of the values life of a nation and also must be borne in
mind that it is not a gate but a road. It is not
Tembodied with a sense of permanence in the
a document for fastidious dialectics but
constitutional document which envisions a social ordering
in which fundamental constitutional values are regarded as the means of ordering the life of people
indispensable to the pursuit of happiness.
In the words of Justice HR Khanna, while the Constitution
State in its onward march towards further progress.
provides for the framework and norms for functioning of
The Constitution is an organic and evolving document.
different organs of the State, viz. the Executive, the Legislature
The Supreme Court has noted that Parts III (dealing with
and the Judiciary, it also reflects the hopes and aspirations
Fundamental Rights) and IV (dealing with the Directive
of the people and encompasses within itself the broad
Principles of State Policy) together constitute the core of
indications as to how the nation is to march forward in times
commitment to social revolution and they, together, are the
to come. A Constitution must, of necessity, be the vehicle of
conscience of the Constitution. The goals set out in Part IV
the life of a nation and also must be borne in mind that it is not
have, therefore, to be achieved without the abrogation of the
a gate but a road. It is not a document for fastidious dialectics
means provided for by Part III. It is in this sense that Parts III
but the means of ordering the life of people.
and IV together constitute the core of our Constitution and
Fortunately however, ours is not a rigid Constitution.
combine to form its conscience.
The Constitution recognizes the power and procedure for
In the early years, the Court dealt with a wide range of
Parliament to amend the Constitution. Justice Khanna in the
fundamental rights cases largely concerning the freedoms
same case also observed that a Constitution provides the
and their reasonable restrictions. This involved freedom of
broad outlines of the administration of a country and concerns
speech and expression, right to religious freedom, right
itself with the problems of the Government. At the time of
to property, etc. During its early years, the Court held that
the framing of the Constitution many views including those
fundamental rights enshrined in separate articles were to be
emanating from conflicting extremes were presented. In most
read separately, in distinct spheres; the seven freedoms of
cases the Constitution is the result of a compromise between
Article 19 were not subsumed in the fabric of life or personal
conflicting views. Those who frame a Constitution cannot be
liberty in Article 21. Justice Fazl Ali dissented, noting that
oblivious of the fact that in the working of a Constitution many
fundamental rights are not isolated and separate but protect
difficulties would have to be encountered and that it is beyond
a common thread of liberty and freedom. This dissent was
the wisdom of one generation to hit upon a permanently
take note of by a bench of 11 judges in R.C. Cooper v.
workable solution for all problems which may be faced by the
Union of India' (Bank Nationalization case) and the theory

120 70 Years of Indian Constitution