INTRODUCTION

The word socialist was added to the Preamble by the 42nd amendment act of 1976. It implies
social and economic equality. Social equality in this context means the absence of
discrimination on the grounds of caste, color, creed, sex, religion, language, etc. Under social
equality, everyone has equal status and opportunities.

Economic equality in this context means that the government will endeavor to make the
distribution of wealth more equal and provide a decent standard of living for all. This is in
effect emphasizing a commitment towards the formation of a Welfare-state.

India has adopted a mixed economy and the government has framed many laws to achieve
the aim of social equality, such as the Abolition of Untouchability and Zamindari, the Equal
Wages Act and the Child Labor Prohibition Act.

In various judicial proceedings, the judiciary had tried to interpret the meaning of the
“socialism” and concept of “socialism” as in Indian Constitution. It is now established fact
that in India only the purpose of “socialism” has been adopted and not the meaning. The
situation is unlike the situation in China and Russia, where the real meaning of socialism has
been adopted.

“Socialism” itself is not a rule; it is a character which is established by many of the provision
of the constitution in form of fundamental rights and directive principle of state policy
 PREAMBLE AND THE “SOCIALISM”

The Preamble to an Act sets out the main objectives which the legislation is intended to
achieve. It is a sort of introduction to the statute and many a times very helpful to understand
the policy and legislative intent.

The Preamble to an Act sets out the main objectives which the legislation is intended to
achieve. It is a sort of introduction to the statute and many a times very helpful to understand
the policy and legislative intent.

The preamble serves the following purposes namely,

It indicates the source from which the Constitution comes.

It contains the enacting clause which brings in to force

3 The Preamble to an Act sets out the main objectives which the legislation is intended to
achieve. It is a sort of introduction to the statute and many a times very helpful to understand
the policy and legislative intent. It declares the great rights and freedoms which the people of
lndia intended to secure to all citizens and basic type of Government and the quality which
was to be established.

42nd Constitutional Amendment has inserted three new words in the preamble: Secularism,
socialism and integrity. Socialism is implicit in the Preamble and the Directive Principles of
the Indian Constitution. The Directive Principles, particularly Art, 39 (b) & (c) of the
Constitution are Charters of social and economic liberties of the people. The word socialism
has, however, no definite democratic and communistic. Generally, the term implies a system
of government in which the means of production is wholly or partially controlled by the
State. In India socialism is, however democratic socialism and not a communistic socialism.
For this purpose, the Preamble has combined both the words, Socialism and Democracy in
the Preamble.
 INTRODUCTION OF TERM: “SOCIALISM”

Nehru in reply to one of the debate on the objective resolution in the constituent assembly
said that the first task of the assembly was “to free India through a new constitution, to feed
the starving people and clothe the naked masses and give every Indian the fullest opportunity
to develop himself according to capacity. Further, that the greatest and most important
question in India is how to solve the problem of poor and starving.”

Nehru believed that the Constituent assembly and the constitution framed by it were to be
parts of larger national endeavor. The goal of national endeavor was a new social order under
which the basic needs of the ordinary citizens will be fulfilled; all would enjoy fundamental
human freedom and have equality of opportunity1

However the founding fathers did not want the constitution to be wedded to any particular
political ideology or islam to be limited by any economic doctrine. They did therefore; agree
to include any reference inter alia to socialism. But, the preamble did mention to resolve to
secure to all citizens economic justice and equality of status and opportunity.

It was the constitution 42nd amendment that introduced the word “socialist” to qualify our
“republic” the text of preamble as amended gives almost the highest place of honor to the
socialist objective. However, the term “socialist” has not been defined by the constitution.

The constitution (Forty –fifth Amendment) bill, attempted to define “socialist” to mean free
from all forms of exploitation – social, economic and political the bill was, however, finally
adopted as 44th amendment without the definition.

“Socialism” is difficult to define. It has meant different things to different people and is
hardly left with any one definite connotation. Dictionary meaning of the word would imply,
in full or in part, placing means of production and distribution in public hands i.e. under
public ownership and/ or control as against private ownership and free enterprise.

JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION OF “SOCIALISM”

1
C.A. DEB, VOL II 316-23
Randhir Singh Vs. Union of India2

The preamble to the Constitution declares the solemn resolution of the people of India to
constitute India into a Sovereign Socialist Democratic Republic. Again the word 'Socialist'
must mean something.

Socialism means elimination of inequality in income and status and standard of living. Also,
after addition of the word ‘socialist” in the preamble , the court in their interpretation of the
constitution could expectedly lean more in favour of the nationalization of the state
ownership of private property, industry, etc, and the right to equal pay for equal work3

Excel Wear v. Union of India4

Concept of socialism or a socialist state has undergone changes from time to tune from
country to country and from thinkers to thinkers. But some basic concept still holds the field.
In India, due to existence of capitalism we cannot accept real meaning of socialism The
difference pointed out between the doctrinaire approach to the problem of socialism and the
pragmatic one is very apt and may enable the courts to lean more and more in favor of
nationalization and State ownership of an industry after the addition of the word 'Socialist in
the Preamble of the Constitution. But so long as the private ownership of an industry is
recognized and governs an overwhelmingly large proportion of our economic structure, is if
possible to say that principles of socialism and social justice can be pushed to such an
extreme so as to ignore completely or to a very large extent the interests of another section of
the public namely the private owners of the undertakings? Most of the industries are owned
by limited companies in which a number of shareholders both big and small hold the share.
There are creditors and depositors and various other persons connected with or having
dealings with the undertaking. In a State owned undertaking the Government or the
Government Company is the owner. If they are compelled to close down, they probably may
protect the labor by several other methods at their command, even, sometimes at the cost of
the public exchequer. It may not be always advisable to do so but that is a different question.
But in a private sector obviously the two matters involved in running it are not on the same
footing. One part is the management of the business done by the owners or their
representatives and the other is running the business for return to the owner not only for the

2
AIR 1982 879
3
Minerva mills V. union of India AIR 1980 SC 1789
4
AIR 1979 SC 25
purpose of meeting his livelihood or expenses but also for the purpose of the growth of the
national economy by formation of more and more capital.

Supreme Court recognized socialism as terms of “mixed economy” concept. The court has
derived the concept of social justice and of economically egalitarian society from the concept
of socialism. Socialism also means distributive justice so as to bring about the distribution of
material resources of the community so as to sub serve the common good.

M. Nagaraj and Ors. Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors5

The point which is important to be noted is that principles of federalism, secularism,

reasonableness and socialism etc. are beyond the words of a particular provision. They are
systematic and structural principles underlying and connecting various provisions of the
Constitution. They give coherence to the Constitution. They make the Constitution an organic
whole. They are part of constitutional law even if they are not expressly stated in the form of
rules. For a constitutional principle to qualify as an essential feature, it must be established
that the said principle is a part of the constitutional law binding on the legislature. Only
thereafter, the second step is to be taken, namely, whether the principle is so fundamental as
to bind even the amending power of the Parliament, i.e. to form a part of the basic structure. 

It is necessary to consider at this juncture the meaning of the word "socialism" envisaged in
the Preamble of the Constitution. Establishment of the egalitarian social order through rule of
law is the basic structure of the Constitution. The Fundamental Rights and the Directive
Principles are the means, as two wheels of the chariot, to achieve the above object of
democratic socialism. The word "socialist" used in the Preamble must be read from the goals
Articles 14, 15, 16, 17, 21, 23, 38, 39, 46 and all other cognate Articles seek to establish, i.e.,
to reduce inequalities in income and status and to provide equality of opportunity and
facilities. Social justice enjoins the Court to uphold Government's endeavor to remove
economic inequalities, to provide decent standard of living to the poor and to protect the
interest of the weaker sections of (he society so as to assimilate all the sections of the society
in a secular integrated socialist Bharat with dignity of person and equality of status to all.

Samatha Vs. State of A.P. and Ors.6

5
AIR2007SC71
6
AIR 1997 SC 3297
Mr. G. D. H. Cole, one of the leading socialist of U. K., in his speech "The Growth
of Socialism" published in 'Law and Opinion in England in the 20th Century' (Morris
Ginsberg, Editor) at page 79-80, has stated that socialism  is a movement aiming at greater
social and economic equality and using extended State action as one of its methods, perhaps
the most distinctive but certainly not the only one needed to be taken into account. The
affairs of the community shall be so administered as to further the common interests of
ordinary men and women by giving to everyone, as far as possible, an equal opportunity to
live a satisfactory and contended existence, coupled with a belief that such opportunity is
incompatible with the essentially unequal private ownership of the means of production. It
requires not merely collective control of the uses, to which these are to be put, but also their
collective ownership and disinterested administration for the common benefit.

This idea of socialism  involves not only the socialization of the essential instruments of
production, in the widest sense, but also the abolition of private income which allow some
men to live without rendering or having rendered any kind of useful service to their
fellowmen and also the sweeping away of forms of educational preference and monopoly
which divide men into social classes. It involves, in effect, whatever is needful for the
establishment of what socialists call a 'classless society' and in pursuance of this aim its
votaries necessarily look for support primarily, though not exclusively, to the working
classes, who form the main body of the less privileged under the existing social order.
Socialists seek to reduce economic and social inequalities not only in order to remove
unearned sources of superior position and influence, but also in order to narrow the gaps
between men to such as are compatible with all men being near enough together in ways of
living to be in substance equals in their mutual intercourse.

Sanjeev Coke Manufacturing Company v.  Bharal Coking Coal Ltd7

It was held at that though the word 'socialist' was introduced in the Preamble by late
amendment of the Constitution, that socialism has always been the goal is evident from the
Directive Principles of the State policy. The amendment was only to emphasize the urgency.
7
1983 1 SCR 1000
Ownership, control and distribution of national productive wealth for the benefit and. use of
the community and the rejection of a system of misuse of its resources for selfish ends is
what socialism is about and the words and thought of Article 39(b) but echo the familiar
language and philosophy of socialism as expounded generally by all socialist writers. 
Socialism is, first of all, a protest against the material and cultural poverty inflicted by
capitalism on the mass of the people. Nationalization of coal mine for distribution was upheld
as a step towards socialism.

In State of Tamil Nadu v. L. Abu Kavur Bai8, the same extended meaning of distribution of
material resources in Article 39(b) was given by another Constitution Bench to uphold Tamil
Nadu State Carnages and Contract Carriages (Acquisition) Act.

D.S. Nakara vs. Union of India9

In this case, the Supreme Court observed that, as to what does a Socialist Republic imply?
Socialism is a much misunderstood word. Values determine contemporary socialism pure and
simple. But it is not necessary at this stage to go into all its ramifications. The principal aim
of a socialist State is to eliminate inequality in income and status and standards of life. The
basic framework of socialism is to provide a decent standard of life to the working people and
especially provide security from cradle to grave. This amongst others on economic side
envisaged economic equality and equitable distribution of income. This is a blend of
Marxism and Gandhism leaning heavily towards Gandhian socialism. During the formative
years, socialism aims at providing all opportunities for pursuing the educational activity. For
want of wherewithal or financial equipment the opportunity to be fully educated shall not be
denied. Ordinarily, therefore, a socialist State provides for free education from primary to Ph.
D but the pursuit must be by those who have the necessary intelligence Quotient and not as in
our society where a brainy young man coming from a poor family will not be able to
prosecute the education for want of wherewithal while the ill-equipped son or daughter of a
well-to-do father will enter the portals of higher education and contribute to national wastage.
After the education is completed, socialism aims at equality in pursuit of excellence in the
chosen avocation without let or hindrance of caste, color, sex or religion and with full
opportunity to reach the top not thwarted by any considerations of status, social or otherwise.

8
(1984) 1SCR 725
9
AIR 1983 SC 130
But even here the less equipped person shall be assured a decent minimum standard of life
and exploitation in any form shall be eschewed. There will be equitable distribution of
national cake and the worst off shall be treated in such a manner as to push them up the
ladder. Then comes the old age in the life of everyone, be he a monarch or a Mahatma, a
worker or a pariah. The old age overtakes each one, death being the fulfillment of life
providing freedom from bondage. But there socialism aims at providing an economic security
to those who have rendered unto society what they were capable of doing when they were
fully equipped with their mental and physical prowess. In the fall of life the State shall ensure
to the citizens a reasonably decent standard of life, medical aid, and freedom from want,
freedom from fear and the enjoyable leisure, relieving the boredom and the humility of
dependence in old age. This is what Article 41 aims when it enjoins the State to secure public
assistance in old age, sickness and disablement. It was such a socialist State which the
Preamble directs the centers of power Legislative Executive and Judiciary-to strive to set up.
From a wholly feudal exploited slave society to a vibrant, throbbing socialist welfare society
is a long march but during this journey to the fulfillment of goal every State action whenever
taken must be directed, aid must be so interpreted, as to take the society one step towards the
goal.

ARTICLES WHICH ESTABLISHES CONCEPT OF SOCIALISM UNDER

CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

The word “socialist” used in the preamble must be read from the goals that Articles 14,
15,n16, 17, 21,23, 38, 39 and 46 and all other cognate articles seek to establish i.e. to reduce
inequalities in income and status and to provide equality of opportunity and facilities.
Article 14: Equality before law - The State shall not deny to any person equality before the
law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.

Article 14 of the constitution embodies the principle of non-discrimination. It may be

worthwhile to note that Article 7 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948
declares that all are equal before the law and entitled without any discrimination to the equal
protection of laws. The constitution is wedded to the concept of inequality. This articles bars
discrimination and bars discriminatory laws. Article 14 is now proving a bulwark against any
arbitrary and discriminatory state action. The horizon of equality as embodied in article 14
have been expanding as a result of judicial pronouncements and article 14 has now come to
have a “ highly activist magnitude”

Equality is the basic feature of the Constitution. The content of Article 14 was originally
interpreted by this Court as a concept of equality confined to the aspects of discrimination
and classification. It is only after the rulings of this Court in Maneka Gandhi and  Ajay
Hasia and Ors. v. Khalid Mujib Sehravardi and Ors10,  that the content of Article 14 got
expanded conceptually so as to comprehend the doctrine of promissory estoppel, non
arbitrariness, compliance with rules of natural justice, eschewing irrationality etc. There is a
difference between "formal equality" and "egalitarian equality" 

The constitutional principle of equality is inherent in the Rule of Law. However, its reach is
limited because its primary concern is not with the content of the law but with its
enforcement and application. The Rule of Law is satisfied when laws are applied or enforced
equally, that is, evenhandedly, free of bias and without irrational distinction. The concept of
equality allows differential treatment but it prevents distinctions that are not properly
justified. Justification needs each case to be decided on case to case basis.

Article 15 and 16: Article 15 states the rule that there shall be no discrimination on grounds
of religion etc. article 15 is an extension of article 15, article 15 (1) expresses a particular
application of the general principle of equality embodied in Article 14. The combined effect
of Article 14 and 15 is that the state cannot pass unequal laws, but if it does pass, unequal
laws , the inequality must be based on reasonable grounds, and that due to Article 15 ,
religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth alone is not and cannot be reasonable ground for
discrimination.

10
(1981)ILLJ103SC
The word “discrimination” in Article 15 (1) involves an element of unfavorable bias. The use
of the word “only” in the Articles 15(1) and 15(2) connotes that what is discountenanced is
discrimination purely and solely on the account of any of the ground mentioned. Further, to
adjudge the validity of an act under these articles, a distinction is to be drawn between the
object underlying the impugned Act and the mode and manner adopted therein to achieve that
object.

Article 15 (2) contains a prohibition of general nature and is not confined to state only Article
15 (3) and 15(4) constitute exception to article 15(1) and 15(2). According to article 15 (3) ,
the state is not prevented from making any “special provision “ for women and children., the
purpose of this article is that to eliminate the socio-economic backwardness of women and to
empower them in such a manner as to bring about effective equality between men and
women. It thus relieves the state from bondage of article 15 (1) and enables it to make
provision to accord socio-economic equality to women.

 Article 16 makes the fundamental right of equality specific relating to job opportunities. 
Article 16(2) significantly speaks of government employment by providing that no citizen
shall be ineligible only on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, descent, place of birth or
any of them or discriminated against in respect of any employment or office under the State.

Article 16(4) is an important provision which empowers the State permitting the provision for
the reservation of appointments and posts in favor of any backward class of citizens which in
the opinion of the State is not adequately represented in the services of the State. The stress is
on backwardness of the citizens and inadequate representation in the services under the State.

Equality is a part of the basic structure and it is impossible to conceive of the Constitution
without equality as one of its central components. That, equality is the basic feature referred
to in the preamble to our Constitution. Special provisions have also been made in Article323-
A which permits establishment of tribunals as special and adjudicatory mechanism. That, 
Article 335 recognizes the importance of efficiency in administration and the various
provisions of the Constitution indicate that public employment was and is even today of
central concern to the Constitution.

It is urged that equality in matters of public employment cannot be considered as merely an

abstract concept. These judgments also provide conclusions based on principles which gave
meaning to equality both as an individual right and as group expectations. It is submitted that
Clause (4) of Article16 is an instance of the classification implicit and permitted by Article16
(1) and that this view of equality did not dilute the importance of Article16
(1) or Article 16(2) but merely treated Article 16(4) as an instance of the classification; that
this relationship of sub clauses within Article16 is not an invitation for reverse discrimination
and that, equality of opportunity cannot be overruled by affirmative action. It is submitted
that "equality in employment" consists of equality of opportunity [Article16(1)], anti-
discrimination [Article16(2)], special classification [Article16(3)], affirmative action
[Article16(4)] which does not obliterate equality but which stands for classification within
equality], and lastly, efficiency [Article335]. As regards the words 'nothing in this article
in Article 1, it is urged that these words cannot wipe out Article 16(1) and, therefore, they
have a limited meaning. It is urged that the said words also occur in
Articles 16(4A) and 16(4B). It is urged that equality in the Constitution conceives the
individual right to be treated fairly without discrimination in the matter of equality of
opportunity.

It also conceives of affirmative action in Article 15(4) and Article16 (4). It enables

classification as a basis for enabling preferences and benefits for specific beneficiary groups
and that neither classification nor affirmative action can obliterate the individual right to
equal opportunity. Therefore, a balance has to be evolved to promote equal opportunities
while protecting individual rights. It is urged that as an individual right in Article16 (1),
enforceability is provided for whereas "group expectation" in Article16 (4) is not a
fundamental right but it is an enabling power which is not coupled with duty. It is submitted
that if the structural balance of equality in the light of the efficiency is disturbed and if the
individual right is encroached upon by excessive support for group expectations; it would
amount to reverse discrimination.

ARTICLE 17: Article 17 abolishes untouchability and forbids its practice in any form. The
enforcement of any disability arising out of “untouchability” is to be an offence punishable in
accordance with law. Abolition of untouchability in itself is complete and its effect is all
pervading applicable to state action as well as acts or omission by individuals, institution or
juristic body of person. The word “untouchability” has not been defined in the constitution or
elsewhere because it is not capable of any precise definition.
Untouchability is neither defined in the Constitution nor in the Act. The Mysore High Court
however, held that the term is not to be understood in its literal or grammatical sense but to
be understood as the practice as it had developed historically in the country. Understood in
this sense, it is a product of the Hindu caste system according to which particular section
amongst the Hindus had been looked down as untouchables by the other sections of that
society. A literal construction of the term would include persons who are treated as
untouchables either temporarily or otherwise for various reasons, such as, suffering from
infectious disease or on account of social boycott resulting from caste or other dispute. In
either case such persons can claim the protection or benefit either of Article 17 or of the 1955
Act.

In exercise of the powers conferred by Article 35 Parliament has enacted the Untouchability
(Offences) Act 1955. This Act was amended by the Untouchability (Offences) Amendment
Act 1976 in order to make the law more stringent to remove untouchability from the society.
It has now been renamed as, The Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955. The expression Civil
Right is defined as any right accruing to a person b reason of the abolition of untouchability
on the ground of untouchability.

ARTICLE 21: Article21 of the Constitution provides that no person shall be deprived of his
life and personal liberty except according to procedure established by law. The Supreme
Court by a majority held that 'procedure established by law' means any procedure established
by law made by the Parliament or the legislatures of the State.

The Supreme Court refused to infuse the procedure with principles of natural justice. It
concentrated solely upon the existence of enacted law. After three decades, the Supreme
Court overruled its previous decision in A.K. Gopalan11  and held in its landmark judgment
in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India and Anr12, that the procedure contemplated by Article
21 must answer the test of reasonableness. The Court further held that the procedure should
also be in conformity with the principles of natural justice. This example is given to
demonstrate an instance of expansive interpretation of a fundamental right. The expression
'life in Article 21 does not connote merely physical or animal existence. The right to life
includes right to live with human dignity. This Court has in numerous cases deduced

11
Supra 11
12
1978 2 SCR 621
fundamental features which are not specifically mentioned in Part-III on the principle that
certain unarticulated rights are implicit in the enumerated guarantees. For example, freedom
of information has been held to be implicit in the guarantee of freedom of speech and
expression

The apex court interpreted that the words "procedure established by law" in article 21 are to
be given a wide and fluid meaning of the expression "due process of law" as given under the
US constitution but it refers to only state made statues laws. If any statutory law prescribed
procedure for depriving a person of his rights or personal liberty it should meet the 
requirements of article 21

However, after two decades this was over ruled in the case of R.C. Cooper VS. Union of
India  13after this there was a series of decisions by the apex court including that of Maneka
Gandhi vs. Union of India.  In this case it was held that any law that deprives the life and
liberty must be just and fair. Krishna Iyer J. rightly said that "procedure" in article 21 means
fair, not formal procedure law is reasonable law not any enacted pieces". Now it is settled
that  That article 21 confers positive rights to life and liberty The word life in article 21
means a life of dignity and not just mere animal survival (this was also upheld in the case of
Francis Caralie14 the procedure of depriving a person of his life and liberty must be
reasonable, air and just.)

DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES OF STATE POLICY

The Directive Principles of State Policy are guidelines to the central and state governments
of India, to be kept in mind while framing laws and policies. These provisions, contained in
Part IV of the Constitution of India, are not enforceable by any court, but the principles laid
down therein are considered fundamental in the governance of the country, making it the duty
of the State[1] to apply these principles in making laws to establish a just society in the
country. The principles have been inspired by the Directive Principles given in the
Constitution of Ireland and also by the principles of Gandhism; and relate to social
justice, economic welfare, foreign policy, and legal and administrative matters. Directive
13
AIR 1970 SC 564
14
(1993)1 scc 645
Principles are classified under the following categories: Gandhian, economic and socialistic,
political and administrative, justice and legal, environmental, protection of monuments and
peace and security.

The concept of Directive Principles of State Policy was borrowed from the Irish Constitution.
DPSPs aim to create social and economic conditions under which the citizens can lead a good
life. They also aim to establish social and economic democracy through a welfare state. 
Article 37, while stating that the Directive Principles are not enforceable in any court of law,
declares them to be "fundamental to the governance of the country and imposes an obligation
on the State to apply them in matters of legislation.  Thus, they serve to emphasize
the welfare state model of the Constitution and emphasise the positive duty of the State to
promote the welfare of the people by affirming social, economic and political justice, as well
as to fight income inequality and ensure individual dignity, as mandated by Article 38.

Article 38 needs to be read along with Article 14. This directive reaffirms what has been
declared in the preamble to the constitution of India. It envisages not only legal justice but
socio-economic justice as well.

Article 38(2 ) directs the state to strive “to minimize the inequalities in income and endevour
to eliminate inequalities in status, facilities, opportunities, not only amongst individual but
also groups of people residing in different areas or engaged in different vocations.”

Article 39 lays down certain principles of policy to be followed by the State, including
providing an adequate means of livelihood for all citizens, equal pay for equal work for men
and women, proper working conditions, reduction of the concentration of wealth and means
of production from the hands of a few, and distribution of community resources to "subserve
the common good". These clauses highlight the Constitutional objectives of building
an egalitarian social order and establishing a welfare state, by bringing about a social
revolution assisted by the State, and has been used to support the nationalization of mineral
resources as well as public utilities. Further, several legislations pertaining to agrarian
reform and land tenure have been enacted by the federal and state governments, in order to
ensure equitable distribution of land resources.

Article 39 (b) and (c) relate to distribution of ownership and control of material resources.
Article 46 relates to “Promotion of educational and economic interests of Scheduled Castes,
Scheduled Tribes and other weaker sections”. Under Article 46 State shall promote with
special care the educational and economic interests of the weaker sections of the people, and
in particular, of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes, and shall protect them from
social injustice and all forms of exploitation.

CONCLUSION

42nd Constitutional Amendment has inserted three new words in the preamble: Secularism,
Socialism and Integrity. Socialism is implicit in the Preamble and the Directive Principles of
the Indian Constitution. The term Economic Justice in the Preamble denotes nothing but
India’s resolution to bring socio-economic revolution. The Directive Principles, particularly
Art, 39 (b) & (c) of the Constitution are Charters of social and economic liberties of the
people. Generally, the term implies a system of government in which the means of production
is wholly or partially controlled by the State. Socialism” is difficult to define. It has meant
different things to different people and is hardly left with any one definite connotation.

India’s socialism is, however a democratic socialism and not a communistic socialism. For
this purpose, the Preamble has combined the words, socialism and Democracy in the
Preamble. This combination of the words; socialism and the democracy have been criticized
by many writers. It has been said that democracy and socialism cannot co-exist. This
criticism is, however, not justified in view of the gradual change of thinking of the modern
socialists their thinking is in line with the ides of welfare State which would prevent only the
excess of exploitation and free competition without destroying individual initiative and
without detriment to the political freedoms. It is thus, marriage of democracy and socialism
which has been embedded in the Indian Constitution.

Significant steps should be taken to implement all the laws which are amended to facilitate
detection, prevention and punishment of crimes against women, and exploitation of children.
Article 21 should be attracted to the cases of children employment in dangerous
employments, because there is a anomaly in Article 24 and 23, which need to be amended.

Labor laws pertaining to children and women should be properly implemented and a time-
bound mechanism should be set up for the follow of action, otherwise all the provisions will
remain on the papers and there can be no proper social justice to this section of the society
which is suffering on account of sex and age.