New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to order an amendment of Article 1 of the Constitution to clear the decks for renaming of the country as only "Bharat."
The Bench headed by Chief Justice of India S A Bobde rejected the plea of a Delhi-based petitioner telling him that the Supreme Court can't do the needful, as "India is already called ‘Bharat’ in the Constitution."
However, he is free to make a representation to the government in this regard. The two other judges on the Bench were Justices A S Bopanna and Hrishikesh Roy. The Supreme Court had dismissed a similar petition in 2016. The PIL, which was twice deferred on Friday and Tuesday since the Bench did not sit, had claimed that such an amendment will enable the citizens to get over the colonial past."
The plea, citing a 1948 Constituent Assembly debate on Article 1 of the then draft Constitution, argued that even at that time, there was a strong wave in favour of naming the country as Bharat or Hindustan.' Dr B R Ambedkar, who drafted the constitution, however, argued that the country was known worldwide as India and that should be retained. Finally, a middle path was adopted and Article 1(1) of the Constitution said: "India that is Bharat shall be a Union of the States". The petitioner in question wanted just "Bharat" to be retained.
He pleaded that the cause of action stemmed from the failure on the part of the Centre to do away with the symbol of slavery by using the name India, instead of Bharat or Hindustan. "The nature of injury being caused to the public is the loss of identity and ethos, as inheritors of the hard-won freedom from foreign rule," he argued. The Bench was not convinced but has nonetheless asked the appropriate ministry to treat the writ petition as a representation and take a call on it.
