RSS's Surgical Strike: Excising "Secular" and "Socialist" Credentials from the Indian Constitution

The words "secular" and "socialist" in the Preamble are not mere vestiges of the Emergency era; they endure as living symbols of the Republic’s enduring commitment to equality, justice, and pluralism.

About the Author
Karan Bir Singh Sidhu is a retired IAS officer with over four decades of public service, including as Special Chief Secretary to the Government of Punjab. A keen constitutionalist and policy commentator, he has written extensively on issues of minority rights, secularism, and the evolving challenges to India’s inclusive democracy. His columns are noted for combining administrative insight with constitutional clarity.

Removing "Secular" and "Socialist" Credentials from the Indian Constitution

The Statement and Its Context

On June 26, 2025, RSS General Secretary Dattatreya Hosabale made a significant statement at an event commemorating 50 years of the Emergency at the Dr. Ambedkar International Centre in New Delhi. Hosabale, who holds the second-highest position in the RSS hierarchy as Sarkaryavah (General Secretary), questioned the inclusion of the words "socialist" and "secular" in the Constitution's Preamble. His exact words were: "The words socialist and secular were added to the Preamble [during the Emergency]. No attempt was made to remove them later. So, there should be a discussion on whether they should remain. I say this in a building named after Babasaheb Ambedkar, whose Constitution did not have these words in the Preamble."

This statement was not made in isolation. Dattatreya Hosabale, aged 70 and serving as the RSS's Sarkaryavah (General Secretary) since March 2021, is widely regarded as the executive head of the organization and the de facto number two in the Sangh hierarchy, directly after the Sarsanghchalak (Chief), Mohan Bhagwat. As Sarkaryavah, Hosabale plays a pivotal role in the day-to-day functioning of the RSS and wields considerable influence, particularly in shaping its cultural, educational, and intellectual outreach. His stature within the organization makes his statements weighty and strategic, rather than incidental or offhand.

Historical Background: The Emergency Era Amendments

The words "secular" and "socialist" were indeed not part of India's original Constitution that came into force on January 26, 1950. These terms were added through the controversial 42nd Amendment Act of 1976, enacted during the Emergency period (June 25, 1975 - March 21, 1977) under Prime Minister Indira Gandhi's Government. The amendment changed India's description from a "sovereign democratic republic" to a "sovereign, socialist, secular, democratic republic."

The 42nd Amendment, often called the "Mini-Constitution" due to its extensive scope, was highly controversial as it significantly altered the balance of power between different branches of government, curtailed judicial powers, and introduced sweeping changes during a period of suspended civil liberties. Most provisions of this amendment came into effect on January 3, 1977, with others enforced on February 1 and April 1, 1977.

Significantly, when the Janata Government under Morarji Desai came to power after the Emergency, they enacted the 44th Amendment Act in 1978 to reverse many of the controversial changes introduced by the 42nd Amendment. However, the words "secular" and "socialist" in the Preamble were retained, indicating that even the post-Emergency government found these principles acceptable.

Political Reactions and Responses

The RSS statement triggered immediate and widespread political condemnation. Congress General Secretary Jairam Ramesh launched a scathing attack, stating that "The RSS has NEVER accepted the Constitution of India. It attacked Dr. Ambedkar, Nehru, and others involved in its framing from November 30, 1949 onwards." The Congress accused the RSS-BJP of having an ideology that "stands in direct opposition to the Indian Constitution" and described Hosabale's statement as "a deliberate assault on the soul of our Constitution."

The Communist Party of India (Marxist) also strongly denounced the proposal, with its Polit Bureau stating that it "exposes the RSS's long-standing objective of subverting the Constitution and its intent to transform India into a Hindu Rashtra." The CPI(M) characterized the RSS position as reflecting "reactionary, anti-people, and divisive ideology."

Congress leaders particularly emphasized that this demand comes despite a recent Supreme Court judgment. On November 25, 2024, a bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar dismissed petitions challenging the inclusion of "socialist" and "secular" in the Preamble, stating there was no "legitimate cause or justification for challenging this constitutional amendment after nearly 44 years."

The RSS's Ideological Framework and Hindu Rashtra Vision

To understand the significance of Hosabale's statement, it's crucial to examine the RSS's foundational ideology. Founded in 1925 by Keshav Baliram Hedgewar, the RSS is a right-wing Hindu nationalist organization that serves as the ideological parent of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). The organization's ultimate objective is the establishment of a Hindu Rashtra - "a nation of the Hindus, by the Hindus and for the Hindus."

The RSS presents itself as a cultural organization while advocating a Hindu nationalistic agenda under the banner of "Hindutva" or "Hindu-ness." With over six million active members, it has been described as the world's largest far-right organization by membership. The organization has consistently worked toward transforming India's Hindus from being a religious community into a political constituency, with observers noting its aim to establish Hindu hegemony in a Hindu-majority country.

The RSS has historically opposed the secular character of the Indian Constitution. It has been banned multiple times by the Indian Government: first in 1948 after Mahatma Gandhi's assassination by RSS member Nathuram Godse, then during the Emergency (1975–1977), and again after the Babri Masjid demolition in 1992.

The New York Connection: A Possible Trigger?

The timing of Hosabale's statement appears to coincide with, if not triggered by, a significant political development in the United States. On June 25, 2025, Zohran Mamdani, a 33-year-old Indian-American of mixed heritage, won the Democratic primary for New York City Mayor, defeating former Governor Andrew Cuomo. If elected, Mamdani would become NYC's first Muslim and Indian-American mayor.

Mamdani's background is particularly relevant to the RSS's concerns. Born to a Hindu Punjabi mother (acclaimed filmmaker Mira Nair) and a Gujarati Shia Muslim father (Columbia University Professor Mahmood Mamdani), he represents the kind of multicultural, secular success story that challenges the RSS's Hindu Rashtra narrative. His campaign extensively used Bollywood themes and Hindi/Urdu language appeals to connect with the South Asian diaspora.

More significantly, Mamdani has been vocally critical of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, particularly regarding the 2002 Gujarat riots. In campaign statements, he reportedly characterized PM Modi as a "war criminal" comparable to Benjamin Netanyahu and claimed that the violence in Gujarat was so severe that "people don't even believe we [Gujarati Muslims] exist anymore." These statements, though factually disputed and criticized even by Indian opposition leaders, represent exactly the kind of international criticism that the RSS-BJP ecosystem finds threatening.

Constitutional Secularism: Meaning and Implications

Indian secularism, as enshrined in the Constitution, differs significantly from the Western concept of separation of church and state. The Indian model of secularism means the state does not favor any particular religion while maintaining equal respect for all faiths. The Constitution ensures that the political system remains separate from religious influence while allowing people of different faiths to coexist peacefully.

The Supreme Court has consistently upheld secularism as a basic feature of the Constitution. In landmark cases like Kesavananda Bharati v State of Kerala and SR Bommai vs Union of India, the Apex Court reinforced that secularism is integral to the Constitution's basic structure. The November 2024 judgment further clarified that "secularism represents one of the facets of the right to equality, intricately woven into the basic fabric that depicts the constitutional scheme's pattern."

Strategic Analysis: The RSS's Long-term Vision

Hosabale's statement appears to be far from a spontaneous remark. As a senior RSS leader with extensive experience in organizational strategy and cultural affairs, his words likely represent a calculated move in the RSS's long-term project of transforming India's constitutional framework. The RSS has maintained a consistent hundred-year vision of establishing a Hindu Rashtra, with recent developments suggesting an acceleration of this agenda.

The organization's strategy involves a multi-pronged approach: infiltrating key government positions, influencing educational institutions through affiliates like Vidya Bharati, and gradually shifting public discourse toward accepting Hindu nationalist principles. The call to remove "secular" and "socialist" from the Preamble fits into this broader pattern of challenging the Constitution's pluralistic foundations.

The RSS ecosystem has demonstrated remarkable patience and strategic thinking. Over the past decade under Modi's leadership, significant steps have been taken, as per the RSS critics, toward the Hindu Rashtra vision: the abrogation of Article 370 in Kashmir, the construction of the Ram Temple in Ayodhya, the Citizenship Amendment Act, and various other measures that prioritize Hindu identity in governance.

The Minorities' Dilemma and Democratic Resilience

The RSS's renewed assault on constitutional secularism places India's religious minorities, particularly Muslims, in a precarious position. The organization's statement appears designed to maintain communal tensions and reinforce the narrative that secularism is an artificial imposition rather than a foundational principle of Indian democracy.

However, India's constitutional framework has shown remarkable resilience. Despite periodic crises and the RSS's sustained efforts to undermine secular principles, the Constitution continues to provide avenues for marginalized groups to seek justice and inclusion. The Supreme Court's recent reaffirmation of secularism and socialism as legitimate constitutional principles demonstrates the judiciary's role in safeguarding constitutional values.

I Have Written Before

Over the past several years, I have written extensively in The KBS Chronicle on themes of secularism, minority rights, and the deeper meanings of India’s constitutional identity. For readers interested in tracing the evolving discourse around these subjects, I offer the following articles in chronological sequence:

• Sovereign Socialist “Secular” Democratic Republic India (21 October 2018)

• India — towards a “Hindu Rashtra” or a truly Secular Republic? (17 March 2023)

• 10 Reasons Why Modi Will Not Formally Declare India as a 'Hindu Rashtra' (26 January 2024)

• Sovereign Socialist “Secular” Democratic Republic of India (28 January 2024)

• Reflections on the Foundation Day of the RSS: Centennial Celebrations Begin (12 October 2024)

Together, these writings trace the arc of India's civilisational and constitutional journey and seek to separate signal from noise in the battle over our republic’s soul.

Looking Ahead: The Battle for India's Constitutional Soul

The RSS's call to remove "secular" and "socialist" from the Constitution represents more than semantic politics—it embodies a fundamental challenge to India's pluralistic democracy. Hosabale's statement, made by the second-most powerful figure in the RSS hierarchy, signals the organization's confidence in pushing its Hindu Rashtra agenda despite lacking absolute political dominance.

The convergence of domestic Hindu nationalist politics with international developments, particularly Mamdani's success in New York, illustrates how global narratives of multicultural democracy challenge the RSS's exclusivist vision. The organization's response reveals both its strategic sophistication and its fundamental insecurity about India's diverse, secular identity.

As India grapples with these competing visions of nationhood, the battle over two words in the Constitution's Preamble becomes a proxy for the larger struggle between inclusive democracy and majoritarian authoritarianism. The outcome will determine whether India remains true to its founding vision of unity in diversity or succumbs to the RSS's century-old dream of a Hindu Rashtra.

The resilience of India’s constitutional framework—bolstered by sustained resistance from a spectrum of political forces and a vigilant civil society—underscores that while the RSS may persist in taking rhetorical aim at the nation's secular foundations, the wholesale transformation of India’s constitutional character remains a formidable, if not insurmountable, challenge. The words "secular" and "socialist" in the Preamble are not mere vestiges of the Emergency era; they endure as living symbols of the Republic’s enduring commitment to equality, justice, and pluralism—values that will ultimately shape India’s democratic destiny in a century where it seeks to position itself as a Vishwaguru, a moral and intellectual guide to the world.