What are the Salient Features of the Constitution of India?

INTRODUCTION

The Twenty-sixth January 1950, was a red-letter day in the long and chequered history of India. On that day the Constitution of India was brought into force and a new republic emerged on the world’s surface. The very fact that the Constitution of the Indian Republic is not the product of a political revolution but of research and deliberations of a body of eminent representatives of the people who sought to improve upon the existing systems of administration, makes knowledge of  constituent assembly indispensable for a proper understanding of this historical document.^[1]

SALIENT FEATURES

The Constitution of India has following features:

1. The lengthiest Constitution in the world: The Constitution of India is the lengthiest written constitution in the world. It has 395 numbered Articles divided into 25 Parts and 12 Schedules. It is the bulkiest, comprehensive, and most elaborative one. This extraordinary bulk of the Constitution is due to several reasons:
2. Because of pervasive diversity in India many states and cultures had their specific concerns, those had to be accommodated.
3. Historical factors, e.g., the influence of the Government of India Act of 1935, which was bulky.
4. Single Constitution for both the Centre and the States.
5. The dominance of legal luminaries in the Constituent Assembly.^[2]
6. To avoid loopholes and defects that may come in the working of the Constitution, the framers incorporate all the good provisions from all the Constitutions of the world as they are aware of the problems faced.

These factors make the Indian Constitution the lengthiest in the world.

• Parliamentary form of Government: The makers followed the British model in toto and established a parliamentary form of Government. The reason for this is that we were accustomed to this type of Government. The essence of the parliamentary system is in its coordination and cooperation between legislative and executive organs. The executive power is vested in the Council of Ministers whose head is the Prime Minister.

Even though the Indian parliamentary system is largely based on the British pattern, there are some fundamental differences between the two. For example, the Indian Parliament is not a sovereign body like the British Parliament. Further, the Indian State has an elected head (president) while the British State has a hereditary head (king or queen).^[3]

• Drawn from various sources: Indian Constitution borrowed most of its provisions from the Constitution of various other countries like Fundamental Rights and Fundamental Duties from the American and Irish Constitutions respectively, the political process has been largely drawn from the British Constitution.^[4] The other provisions are drawn from the Constitutions of Canada, Australia, Germany, the USSR, France, South Africa, Japan, and so on.

The Government of India Act, 1935 also influenced and became the major source of our Constitution. The Federal Scheme, Judiciary, Governors, Emergency Powers, The Public Service Commission, and most of the administrative details are drawn from this Act. Indian Constitution adopts a great resemblance to the act of 1935.

• A unique blend of rigidity and flexibility: The Constitution of India is both rigid and flexible and to justify this Article- 368 plays a major role. The fact that the Constitution of Indian has been amended more than 100 times since its adoption disapproves of the view taken by Sir Ivor Jennings who had characterized our Constitution as rigid. Reasons for considering it to  be rigid are as follows:
• The process of amendment is complicated and difficult.
• Matters which should have been left to ordinary legislation having been incorporated into the Constitution, no change in these matters is possible without undergoing the process of amendment.^[5]
• The federal system with unitary bias: The most remarkable feature of the Indian Constitution is that being a federal Constitution it acquires a unitary character during the time of emergency. During the proclamation of emergency, all powers are centralised in the Union Government and Constitution acquires a unitary character.^[6]

The Indian Constitution has been variously described as ‘federal in form but, unitary in spirit’, ‘quasi-federal’ by K.C. Where, ‘bargaining federalism’ by Morris Jones, ‘co-operative federalism’ by Granville Austin, ‘federation with a centralizing tendency’ by Ivor Jennings and ‘asymmetric federal’  by Louise tillin.

• Synthesis of parliamentary sovereignty and judicial supremacy: The doctrine of the sovereignty of Parliament is associated with the British Parliament while the principle of judicial supremacy with that of the American Supreme Court.^[7] The framers of the Indian Constitution have preferred a proper synthesis of the two. On one hand, the Parliament can amend the major portion of the Constitution while on the other hand, the Supreme Court can declare the parliamentary laws as unconstitutional through its power of judicial review. 
• Integrated and independent judiciary:  The Indian Judiciary is integrated as well as independent. There is a famous maxim that unless there is a remedy there is no right and for the same purpose judiciary acts as a remedy to the fundamental rights. Hence for this independent and impartial judiciary has been established.
• Fundamental Rights: Fundamental Rights are incorporated under Part III of the Constitution. These are the rights to the citizens and prohibitions against the state. Any law against those rights may be declared unconstitutional by the courts. These rights are, however, not absolute and subject to certain restrictions. The aggrieved person can directly move to the Supreme Court for issuing the writs of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, and quo-warranto for the restoration of his rights.

Part III of the Indian Constitution guarantees six fundamental rights to all the citizens:

(a) Right to Equality (Articles 14–18);

(b) Right to Freedom (Articles 19–22);

(c) Right against Exploitation (Articles 23–24);

(d) Right to Freedom of Religion (Articles 25–28);

(e) Cultural and Educational Rights (Articles 29–30); and

 (f) Right to Constitutional Remedies (Article 32).

• Fundamental Duties:  The Constitution (42^nd Amendment) Act, 1976 has introduced a code of ten fundamental duties for citizens and the eleventh one is added by the 86^th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2002. These are the constant reminders to the citizens that while enjoying their rights they have certain duties to perform. These fundamental duties are envisaged in Part-IV–A of the Constitution. They oblige citizens to respect the Constitution, national flag and national anthem; to protect the sovereignty and integrity of the country; to promote the spirit of common brotherhood amongst all the people; to preserve the rich heritage of our composite culture and so on.
• Directive Principles of State Policy: Directive Principles of State Policy are enumerated in Part-IV of the Indian Constitution. They seek to establish a ‘welfare state’ in India. But unlike Fundamental Rights, these are not enforceable in the courts of law. Yet it does not decrease its importance as the real sanction behind them is political, that is, public opinion. The governments are responsible for fulfilling these promises made to people of India at the time of independence. In the case of Minerva Mills v. Union of India^[8], the Supreme Court held that the Indian Constitution is founded on the bedrock of the balance between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles.
• Adult Suffrage: The old system of the communal electorates has been abolished and the uniform adult suffrage system has been adopted. Under the Indian Constitution, every man and woman above 18 years of age have been given the right to elect representatives for the legislature. ^[9]The adoption of the universal adult franchise under Article-326 without any qualification either of sex, property, taxation, or the like is a bold experiment in India due to its huge population and vast size, illiteracy, poverty, and social inequality and this experiment has crowned its success.
•  Single Citizenship: Though the Constitution of India is federal it provides for single citizenship for the whole country, unlike the American Constitution. Every citizen is the citizen of India and enjoys the same rights irrespective of the state he belongs.
• Secular state: The term ‘secular’ has been added in the Preamble of the Indian Constitution by the 42^nd Amendment Act of 1976. The State is secular when it has no religion of its own. It has nothing to do with the relation between man to God. It only deals with the relation between man to man. It simply means that it treats all religions equally. The following provisions of the Constitution reveal the secular character of the Indian State:
• The Preamble secures liberty of belief, faith, and worship of  all people  of India.
• The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or equal protection of the laws (Article 14).
• The State shall not discriminate against any citizen on the ground of religion (Article 15).
• Equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters of public employment (Article 16).
• All persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess, practice, and propagate any religion (Article 25).
• Every religious denomination or any of its sections shall have the right to manage its religious affairs (Article 26).
• No person shall be compelled to pay any taxes for the promotion of a particular religion (Article 27).
• No religious instruction shall be provided in any educational institution maintained by the State (Article 28).
• Any section of the citizens shall have the right to conserve its distinct language, script, or culture (Article 29).
• All minorities shall have the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice (Article 30).
• The State shall endeavor to secure for all the citizens a Uniform Civil Code (Article 44).^[10]

CRITICISM OF THE CONSTITUTION

The Constitution of India, despite its great importance, has been criticized on many grounds like it has been said that there is nothing original and new in it. It has all been borrowed from several documents of the world Constitution. But this cannot be justified as the framers have made necessary changes as per the Indian society. It is also said that the Indian Constitution is a carbon copy of the 1935 Act. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar answered the above criticism in the Constituent Assembly in the following way: “As to the accusation that the Draft Constitution has reproduced a good part of the provisions of the Government of India Act, 1935, I make no apologies. There is nothing to be ashamed of in borrowing. It involves no plagiarism. Nobody holds any patent rights in the fundamental ideas of a Constitution. What I am sorry about is that the provisions taken from the Government of India Act, 1935, relate mostly to the details of administration”^[11].

 The critics said that the Indian Constitution is too legalistic and very complicated and hence it is a paradise of the lawyers as said by Sir Ivor Jennings. In this context, H.K. Maheswari, a member of the Constituent Assembly, observed: “The draft tends to make people more litigious, more inclined to go to law courts, less truthful and less likely to follow the methods of truth and non-violence. If I may say so, the draft is a lawyer’s paradise. It opens up vast avenues of litigation and will give our able and ingenious lawyers plenty of work to do”^[12].

^[1] D.D. Basu, Introduction of the Constitution of India, p.g. 3, (3^rd Ed., 1946).
^[2] M. Laxmikant, Indian Polity, (6^th Ed., 2020).
^[3] Ibid.
^[4] P.M. Bakshi, The Constitution of India, p.g. 4, (5^th Ed., 2002).
^[5] Dr. J.N. Pandey, Constitutional Law of India, p.g. 26, (54^th Ed., 2017).
^[6] Ibid.
^[7] M. Laxmikant, Indian Polity, (6th Ed., 2020).
^[8]A.I.R. 1980 SC 1789.
^[9] Dr. J.N. Pandey, Constitutional Law of India, p.g. 27, (54th Ed., 2017).
^[10] M. Laxmikant, Indian Polity, (6th Ed., 2020).
^[11] Constituent Assembly Debates, Volume VII, pp.35–38.
^[12] Constituent Assembly Debates, Volume VII, P.293.