Jahanvi Agarwal
The Supreme Court on 14th August 2024 dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that sought official definitions for the words used in the Preamble to the Indian Constitution, wherein the case was brought before a Division Bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and PV Sanjay Kumar.
The petitioner, Shivam Mishra, argued that he found certain terms in the Preamble, such as ‘fraternity’, to be unclear and requested the Court to provide official definitions. He claimed that without these definitions, he would be “aggrieved”. However, the Court found this argument unconvincing and saw no merit in the petitioner’s request.
In a straightforward response, the Bench emphasized that it is not the judiciary’s role to define constitutional terms, stating, “It is not our job to define. You do it yourself.” The judges further noted their confusion regarding the petitioner’s submissions, remarking, “We don’t understand your pleadings. You have said that if we don’t give relief, you will be aggrieved.”
Ultimately, the Court dismissed the petition, leaving it to the petitioner to seek out the meanings of the Preamble’s words on his own, rather than relying on judicial intervention.
Case Name: Shivam Mishra v. Supreme Court of India
Bench: Justices Sanjiv Khanna and PV Sanjay Kumar.