Create a custom practice set
Pick category, difficulty, number of questions, and time limit. Start instantly with your own quiz.
Generate QuizGK Question
Regarding the legal status of the Preamble, which statement is correct based on Supreme Court judgments?
- The Preamble is not part of the Constitution and has no legal force
- The Preamble is part of the Constitution, has interpretive value for resolving ambiguities, but is not directly enforceable like Fundamental Rights
- The Preamble overrides all other constitutional provisions in case of conflict
- The Preamble can be amended by simple majority in Parliament
Answer: The Preamble is part of the Constitution, has interpretive value for resolving ambiguities, but is not directly enforceable like Fundamental Rights
Preamble's legal status: (a) Berubari Union case (1960): Held Preamble not part of Constitution, merely introductory statement with no legal force, (b) Kesavananda Bharati case (1973): Overruled Berubari; held Preamble is part of Constitution, amendable under Article 368 but basic structure unamendable, (c) Current position: (i) Preamble is part of Constitution, (ii) Has interpretive value: Courts use Preamble to resolve ambiguities in statutes, constitutional provisions, (iii) Not directly enforceable: Citizens cannot petition courts based solely on Preamble violations; must invoke specific provisions (Fundamental Rights, Directive Principles), (d) Applications: (i) Puttaswamy: Preamble dignity guided privacy recognition under Article 21, (ii) SR Bommai: Preamble secularism guided federalism interpretation under Article 356, (e) Illustrates constitutional interpretation: Preamble as normative compass guiding interpretation, limiting amendments, inspiring transformative governance while being part of Constitution but not standalone enforceable provision.