The Makers of Indian Constitution Myth & Reality

Email

Whatsapp

Facebook

Pinterest

Twitter

Copy link

The framing of a constitution calls for the highest Statecraft. Those interested with it have to realize the practical need of the government and have, at the same time, to keep in view the ideals which have inspired the nation. They have to be men of vision, yet they cannot forget the grass roots. They have to be exponents of ideals but in quest for them they cannot forsake basic pragmatism nor ignore harsh realities. They have to put aside for the time being the ambition, which drives the politician to search for power and the thinker to the construction of an abstract system. Not anointed priests but men with proven grasp of affairs, who have developed resilience and spaciousness of mind through seasoned and diversified experience, through study of history not only of their country but also of other countries, through calm contemplation of the present, through deep thinking and sensitive awareness of the inarticulate feelings of their fellow men, have to be the persons whom destiny and historical forces entrust with the task of drafting the constitution.

A Constitution is different from ordinary statutes, which are designed to meet the fugitive exigencies of the hour. The statutes can be repealed or amended when the exigencies change. A Constitution states, or ought to state, not the rules of the passing hour, but the principles for an expanding future. It is only on rare occasions that needs should arise for amendment of Constitution, much less for its repeal or abrogation. Fortunately for us those entrusted with the task of framing the Constitution of India were fully alive to their historic role and the supreme importance of their assignment. Most of them were politicians but that was the age when politics attracted the best in society. Those were also the times when politics signified an attachment to certain values, and adherence to certain convictions and willingness to suffer, if need be, for those values and convictions. The top leaders also saw to it that in the election of members of the Constituent Assembly partisan considerations should not stand in the way of selecting others from outside the party who had made a mark in various fields.

I am glad to respond to Shri Sheshrao Chavan to contribute a Preface to his book "The Makers of Indian Constitution-Myth and Reality." It is a daunting task to add to the erudite and inspiring Foreword written by Justice Shri H.R. Khanna for whom I have the deepest affection and admiration. When Justice Khanna was superseded for the appointment to the high office of Chief Justice of India obviously because of his historic dissent in the Habeas Corpus case during the Emergency, I had said to him in an accolade that it was better to be a living legend than to be the Chief Justice of India. Shri Chavan's book has a propitious blessing in Mr. Justice Khanna's Foreword. I consider it a privilege to associate myself with his words of wisdom.

The framing of every Constitution in the world has its own myth and reality. The Constitution of India is no exception.

Bharat Ratna Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar and the Constitution of India have become synonymous. But in framing the Constitution Dr. Ambedkar and the Drafting Committee had no free hand. As said by Shri Syed Muhammad Sa'adulla:

"The Drafting Committee was not a free agency. We were handicapped by various methods and circumstance from the very start. We were only asked to dress the baby and the baby was nothing but the 'Objectives Resolution,' which the Constituent Assembly passed. We were told that the Constitution must conform and remain within the Four Corners of that Objectives Resolution. Moreover, whatever, we did had to be considered and accepted by this House (Constituent Assembly). How dare any member of the Drafting Committee be so arrogant as to thrust the opinion of seven members against the total number of 308 in the House."