By: Prof. Neelam Mahajan Singh
The first article of the Constitution of 'Bharat' states: '1(1) India, that is, Bharat, shall be a Union of States. (2) The States and their territories shall be such as are specified in the First Schedule. (c) such other territories as may be acquired. Substituted for clause (2) by section 2 of the Constitution (Seventh Amendment) Act, 1956.
Dr. Mohan Bhagwat, Sarsanghchalak of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh appealed to the people not to use the word 'India' and instead use 'Bharat'.
Dr. Mohan Bhagwat, Sarsanghchalak, RSS
Dr. Mohan Bhagwat, was speaking at a function in Guwahati, where he said, “We should stop using the word 'India' and instead use ‘Bharat’. Sometimes we use India to explain it to English speaking people. It comes in a flow, however we should stop using it". Over a span of four years, two Chief Justices of the Supreme Court of India, dealt with the arguments of 'Bharat' instead of 'India' differently.
Former Chief Justice T. S. Thakur, upheld the right of citizens to choose between the two names. Justice S. A. Bobde suggested that the petition for change of the name to be sent to the Ministry of Home Affairs; where it could be taken up.
Justice V. B. Gupta, ex Judge of Delhi High Court & ex Judicial Member; National Consumer Forum
Jurispurist, Justice Vidya Bhushan Gupta, former judge of the Delhi High Court and former judicial member of the National Consumer Forum, drew the attention to Article 1 of the Constitution, which provides for 'India that is Bharat', saying that the use of 'Bharat' already existed. Justice V. B. Gupta is of the opinion, "the use of the word 'Bharat' has been printed in the Constitution for 74 years. There should not be any confusion or social barriers regarding this". 'Bharat is used in Hindi and has been selected by the framers of our Constitution".
Jurispurist, Justice Vidya Bhushan Gupta, former judge of the Delhi High Court and former judicial member of the National Consumer Forum, drew the attention to Article 1 of the Constitution, which provides for 'India that is Bharat', saying that the use of 'Bharat' already existed. Justice V. B. Gupta is of the opinion, "the use of the word 'Bharat' has been printed in the Constitution for 74 years. There should not be any confusion or social barriers regarding this". 'Bharat is used in Hindi and has been selected by the framers of our Constitution".
President Draupadi Murmu used 'President of Bharat' on the G-20 dinner invitation card, for the foreign dignitaries; that sparked a controversy over whether the government sould drop 'India' and use only 'Bharat.
In March 2016, Justice T.S. Thakur, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of India, told a BJP activist Niranjan Bhatwal from Maharashtra, that if he wished to call his country 'Bharat' or 'India', it's his choice. No one authority, state or court had the power to dictate to citizens what they should call their country. “If you want to call this country 'India', then go right ahead and call it India. If someone wants to call this country Bharat', then let him call it India. We will not interfere", Justice Thakur had said. Bhatwal had sought clarity on the wording of Article 1 of the Constitution, which states that 'India, that is 'Bharat', shall be a Union of States'. He argued that the word 'India' is not a literal translation to the word 'Bharat'. History and scriptures reveal this country as 'Bharat'. It has been argued that 'India' is a name coined by the British imperialism. Citizens should have a clear understanding of what they should call their country. The petition said that the Constituent Assembly had debated on several names for the nascent republic and some of them were names like 'Bharat, Hindustan, Hind, Bharatbhoomi or Bharatvarsha'. 'India' was a symbol of the recognition of the republic by other countries.
Another petition came up before Chief Justice Sharad Arvind Bobde in June 2020, while India was battling the COVID-19 pandemic. This time the hearing was conducted virtually. The petition demanded that 'India' be removed from Article 1 and said there should be uniformity regarding the name of the nation. Pointing to the petitioner, Justice Bobde replied, "Both Bharat and India are names given in the Constitution. India is already called 'Bharat' in the Constitution." However, Chief Justice Bobde dismissed the petition and he suggested that the petition be converted into a representation to the Union Home Ministry. After all, India was 'a gold bird'. The name 'Bharat' is used in many Indian languages. It is derived from the name of the 'Vedic rhymes', mentioned in the Rigveda. The major kingdoms of Aryavarta have been named as one. The name 'India' came about in such a way that the fact of independence in 1947 from British imperialism, 'Independent Nation Declared in August', i.e. INDIA.
In retrospect it's urged will that our country and people will have to remain united and one! The word 'Bharat' is already being used in millions of ways. The United Nations has also said that If India gives its notification in writing then it will be changed to 'Bharat'. We the people of India are one and 'Bharat' has been used for 74 years. Now if the official notification is issued only then it will be implemented and accepted peacefully. There should not be any kind of political and social conflict on the use of term 'Bharat'. Bharat has to give effective and inclusiveness leadership to the world, as comity of nations.
Prof. Neelam Mahajan Singh
(Senior journalist, political analyst, Television personality, Solicitor for human rights protection & philanthropist)
Comments
Post a Comment