'India should be named Bharat', a demand on which the
Supreme Court has sought comments from the Centre and the states.
The apex court on
Friday decided to examine questions raised on the naming of the country and
sought response from the Centre on the plea demanding change in the name from
'India' to 'Bharat'. A bench comprising Chief Justice H L Dattu and
Justice Arun Mishra also issued notice to all state governments and union
territories on the PIL which called for restraining the Centre from using the
name of India for
any government purposes and in official papers.
The petition filed by Niranjan Bhatwal, claiming to be a social activist from
Maharashtra, said that even the non- government organisations and corporates
should be directed to use 'Bharat' for all official and unofficial purposes.
The PIL said in the Constituent Assembly, the prominent suggestions for naming
the country were "Bharat, Hindustan, Hind and Bharatbhumi or Bharatvarsh
and names of that kind".
Among the various
questions raised in the PIL were whether insertion of India in Article 1 of the
Constitution was just for reference, in order to repeal the Government of India
Act 1935, and the Indian Independence Act 1947, wherein this country had been
referred to as India, and sought to be repealed by Article 395 of the
Constitution? Further, it asked whether insertion of 'India' was mere
referential for de-jure recognition of the country by countries of other parts
of the world for diplomatic purposes.
The PIL also said
whether Hindi language excerpts of Article 1 Clause 1 of the Constitution
denotes the same meaning, as it denotes in the English language of the
Constitution in relation to establish the name of the country.
dna
