Question map
The Preamble to the Constitution of India is
Explanation
The correct answer is Option 4. The legal status of the Preamble has evolved through landmark Supreme Court judgments, specifically the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973), which overruled the Berubari Union case to declare that the Preamble is indeed a part of the Constitution.
However, its legal effect is nuanced:
- Non-justiciable: Like the Directive Principles, the Preamble is non-enforceable in a court of law. It is neither a source of power for the legislature nor a prohibition upon its powers.
- Interpretative Role: While it has no independent legal effect (making Option 3 incorrect), it serves as a "key to the minds of the makers." It is used to clarify ambiguous provisions of the Constitution.
Therefore, while it is an integral part of the constitutional framework, it functions only in tandem with other specific articles to provide context and purpose, validating Option 4.
PROVENANCE & STUDY PATTERN
Guest previewThis is a classic 'Laxmikanth Sitter' but with a twist of legal nuance. It tests not just the binary fact (Is it a part? Yes/No) but the *consequence* of that status. The trap lies in distinguishing between 'no legal effect' (Option A) and 'no independent legal effect' (Option D).
This question can be broken into the following sub-statements. Tap a statement sentence to jump into its detailed analysis.
- Statement 1: Is the Preamble to the Constitution of India a part of the Constitution and does it have no legal effect?
- Statement 2: Is the Preamble to the Constitution of India not a part of the Constitution and does it have no legal effect?
- Statement 3: Is the Preamble to the Constitution of India a part of the Constitution and does it have the same legal effect as any other part of the Constitution?
- Statement 4: Is the Preamble to the Constitution of India a part of the Constitution but without independent legal effect apart from other parts of the Constitution?
- Directly records the Kesavananda Bharati (1973) decision that the Preamble is a part of the Constitution.
- States the Court overruled its earlier view and held the Preamble can be amended (implying constitutional status).
- Expressly says the Preamble is not enforceable in a court of law (i.e., not independently justiciable).
- Also describes the Preamble as stating objectives and aiding interpretation, distinguishing enforceability from interpretative role.
Explains a doctrinal distinction: the Preamble 'is not enforceable in a court of law' but 'aids the legal interpretation' and indicates objectives and source of authority.
A student could use this rule to test whether 'no legal effect' means nonβjusticiability (not enforceable) rather than nonβinfluence on interpretation, by checking judicial uses of the Preamble.
Connects amendability to constitutional status: the Kesavananda case treated the Preamble as part of the Constitution and held it can be amended subject to basic features.
A student could check whether a provision amendable under Article 368 is necessarily 'part of the Constitution' to assess the claim that the Preamble is not part.
Summarises conflicting judicial positions: earlier opinion said Preamble not part, but Kesavananda overruled to hold it is partβshowing legal status has been disputed and evolved.
A student could trace the chronology of court decisions (e.g., Berubari, Kesavananda) to see how the 'part' question was resolved and what that implies for legal effect.
Defines Preamble as the 'identity card' and notes it was amended (42nd Amendment added words), linking substantive content and amendment history to constitutional significance.
A student could infer that because it was amended, the Preamble exercises substantive influence and then check whether amendment practice implies legal status.
Presents multiple possible textbook answer-choices including 'a part but has no legal effect' and 'not a part and has no legal effect', showing common confusion and presenting alternate doctrinal positions.
A student could use these contrasting formulations to distinguish 'part of Constitution' from 'has independent legal effect' and investigate which is supported by case law/articles.
This statement analysis shows book citations, web sources and indirect clues. The first statement (S1) is open for preview.
Login with Google to unlock all statements. Unlock full statement-level provenance with ExamRobot Pro.
- Explicitly records the Supreme Court's view that the Preamble is an integral/part of the Constitution.
- Notes the Preamble was enacted by the Constituent Assembly and must be used to read and interpret the Constitution.
- Describes Kesavananda (1973) holding that the Preamble is a part of the Constitution.
- Explains the Court held the Preamble can be amended under Article 368 (subject to preservation of basic features), implying constitutional status.
- States the Preamble is not by itself enforceable in a court of law, i.e., it does not create directly justiciable rights.
- Describes the Preamble's role as stating objectives and aiding interpretation when constitutional language is ambiguous.
This statement analysis shows book citations, web sources and indirect clues. The first statement (S1) is open for preview.
Login with Google to unlock all statements. Unlock full statement-level provenance with ExamRobot Pro.
- Records Kesavananda Bharati (1973) holding that the Preamble is a part of the Constitution.
- States the Preamble can be amended under Article 368, subject to protection of the Constitution's basic features.
- Explicitly notes the Preamble is not enforceable in a court of law (i.e., lacks independent justiciable effect).
- Describes the Preamble as stating constitutional objectives and as an aid to interpretation rather than a source of enforceable rights.
- Explains the Supreme Court earlier took the view that the Preamble was not part of the Constitution but later in Kesavananda reversed that position.
- Emphasises the Preamble's role as a key to the makers' intent and a tool for interpreting ambiguous articles.
This statement analysis shows book citations, web sources and indirect clues. The first statement (S1) is open for preview.
Login with Google to unlock all statements. Unlock full statement-level provenance with ExamRobot Pro.
- [THE VERDICT]: Sitter. Direct hit from Laxmikanth Chapter 5 (Preamble) and D.D. Basu. If you read the 'Significance' section, you solve this.
- [THE CONCEPTUAL TRIGGER]: The evolution of Supreme Court judgments regarding the Preamble (Berubari Union 1960 vs. Kesavananda Bharati 1973).
- [THE HORIZONTAL EXPANSION]: Memorize the Trilogy: Berubari (Not part) β Kesavananda (Part) β LIC of India (Integral Part). Key attributes: 1) Non-justiciable (not enforceable in courts). 2) Neither a source of power to legislature nor a prohibition. 3) Can be amended (Art 368) subject to Basic Structure. 4) Enacted *after* the rest of the Constitution.
- [THE STRATEGIC METACOGNITION]: Don't stop at 'It is a part'. Ask 'So what?'. The legal implication is that while it cannot be enforced alone (like a Fundamental Right), it is used to resolve ambiguity in other Articles. The preparation logic is: Status β Justiciability β Utility.
This tab shows concrete study steps: what to underline in books, how to map current affairs, and how to prepare for similar questions.
Login with Google to unlock study guidance. Available with ExamRobot Pro.
Kesavananda Bharati (1973) affirmed that the Preamble is part of the Constitution and can be amended under Article 368.
This is a core constitutional law precedent frequently tested in UPSC; it links to basic structure doctrine, amendment power, and interpretation questions. Mastering this enables answering questions on constitutional status and judicial review.
- Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 5: Preamble of the Constitution > 1 AMENDABILITY OF l THE PREAMBLE > p. 48
- Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 5: Preamble of the Constitution > PREAMBLE AS PART OF THE CONSTITUTION > p. 47
The Preamble is described as stating constitutional objectives and aiding interpretation while not being independently enforceable in court.
High-yield for questions distinguishing justiciability from interpretative value; connects to Fundamental Rights interpretation and judicial powers. Helps answer questions on legal effect and practical utility of constitutional preambles.
- Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 3: THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE CONSTITUTION > EVERY Constitution has a philosophy of its own. > p. 22
- Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 5: Preamble of the Constitution > PREAMBLE AS PART OF THE CONSTITUTION > p. 47
The Preamble can be amended under Article 368, subject to protection of the Constitution's basic features.
Important for essay and polity mains questions on amendment power and basic structure doctrine; links to debates on what aspects are inviolable and how amendments interact with foundational text.
- Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 5: Preamble of the Constitution > 1 AMENDABILITY OF l THE PREAMBLE > p. 48
The question hinges on whether the Preamble is constitutionally part of the text or external to it.
High-yield because many questions ask whether the Preamble is part of the Constitution and how courts have ruled on it; mastering this clarifies doctrinal shifts and links to landmark judgments and amendment law. This concept connects to constitutional interpretation, judicial review, and amendment powers.
- Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 5: Preamble of the Constitution > PREAMBLE AS PART OF THE CONSTITUTION > p. 47
- Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 5: Preamble of the Constitution > 1 AMENDABILITY OF l THE PREAMBLE > p. 48
Distinguishes the Preamble's non-justiciability as a source of enforceable rights from its role as an aid to interpreting ambiguous provisions.
Important for answering questions on justiciability and remedies (e.g., Article 32) and for analysing how courts use non-operative parts of the Constitution; helps tackle fact-based judicial interpretation and rights-based questions in mains and interview.
- Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 3: THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE CONSTITUTION > EVERY Constitution has a philosophy of its own. > p. 22
- Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 5: Preamble of the Constitution > PREAMBLE AS PART OF THE CONSTITUTION > p. 47
Whether the Preamble can be amended is tied to Article 368 and the doctrine that certain core features cannot be destroyed.
Crucial for understanding the intersection of amendment powers and the basic structure doctrine; equips aspirants to discuss Kesavananda-type issues and limits on parliamentary power in both prelims and mains essays/answers.
- Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 5: Preamble of the Constitution > 1 AMENDABILITY OF l THE PREAMBLE > p. 48
- Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 5: Preamble of the Constitution > PREAMBLE AS PART OF THE CONSTITUTION > p. 47
The Preamble is judicially recognised as an integral part of the Constitution and was enacted by the Constituent Assembly.
High-yield for constitutional law questions: explains constitutional status, links to amendment and interpretation debates, and is tested in questions on basic structure and constituent power.
- Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 5: Preamble of the Constitution > PREAMBLE AS PART OF THE CONSTITUTION > p. 47
- Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 5: Preamble of the Constitution > 1 AMENDABILITY OF l THE PREAMBLE > p. 48
Discover the small, exam-centric ideas hidden in this question and where they appear in your books and notes.
Login with Google to unlock micro-concepts. Unlock micro-concepts with ExamRobot Pro.
The Preamble was enacted by the Constituent Assembly *after* the entire Constitution was already enacted to ensure it was in conformity with the Constitution. This chronological fact is a potential future statement.
Use the 'Uselessness Test'. If Option A ('No legal effect') were true, the Preamble would be legally ornamental and useless. In law, every word in a statute is presumed to have a purpose. Option D ('No legal effect independently') assigns it a purpose (interpretive aid) without making it a standalone law. Always choose the option that gives the text a function rather than rendering it void.
Links to GS-2 (Basic Structure Doctrine). The Preamble contains the 'Basic Features' (Secularism, Republic, etc.) which limits the amending power of Parliament under Article 368. It is the bridge between the text of the Constitution and the intent of the makers.
Access hidden traps, elimination shortcuts, and Mains connections that give you an edge on every question.
Login with Google to unlock The Vault. Unlock the Mentor's Vault with ExamRobot Pro.