Constitution of India
Article 393: Short Title
Part XXII — Short Title, Commencement, Authoritative Text in Hindi and Repeals
Article 393
WHAT IT SAYS: This Constitution may be called the Constitution of India. WHAT IT MEANS: It formally assigns the official short title to the supreme law of the land, establishing its legal identity for all citation and reference purposes. KEY DOCTRINE: No specific doctrine arises directly, but it underpins the doctrine of Constitutional Sovereignty — the Constitution is an indigenous, self-authored document, not imposed by any external authority.
Constitutional Inspiration
SOURCE(S): 1. United Kingdom — Short Titles Act, 1896 and standard British legislative drafting convention of assigning a 'short title' to every statute. Original provision: Every Act of Parliament carries a short title clause for ease of citation. What India kept: The practice of including a formal short title clause at the end of the constitutional document. 2. United States — Article VII & Preamble of the US Constitution assert the document's identity through 'We the People' and its formal signing clause. Original provision: The US Constitution identifies itself through the Preamble's opening words. What India kept: The concept of formally naming the Constitution to assert popular sovereignty. INDIA'S SPECIFIC ADAPTATIONS: 1. Placed as a dedicated article (Art. 393) rather than only in the Preamble — ensures an explicit statutory-style short title for legal citation clarity. 2. Used the phrase 'may be called' — standard Indian legislative drafting style inherited from the General Clauses Act, 1897. 3. Named it 'Constitution of India' (not 'Constitution of Bharat') — the Constituent Assembly chose the English name as the primary title, with the Hindi equivalent 'Bharat ka Samvidhan' given authoritative status later via the 58th Amendment (1987). IF ORIGINAL INDIAN CONTRIBUTION: The framers felt a formal short title was essential to mark the complete legal break from the Government of India Act, 1935, and establish a new indigenous constitutional identity.
Constituent Assembly Debate
DEBATED ON: 17 October 1949 (CAD Volume X) KEY SPEAKERS: 1. Drafting Committee Member (name not individually recorded) — Introduced Draft Article 313A on the floor, proposing the short title 'Constitution of India'. MAJOR DISAGREEMENTS: None — The Draft Article did not generate any discussion or debate in the Constituent Assembly. FINAL OUTCOME: Draft Article 313A was adopted without any debate or amendment on 17 October 1949; it was not present in the original Draft Constitution and was introduced as a new addition by the Drafting Committee. AMBEDKAR'S KEY QUOTE (if available): No specific quote recorded — the article was adopted without discussion.
Landmark Judgments
LANDMARK JUDGMENTS: Note: Article 393 is declaratory and non-justiciable. No Supreme Court or High Court judgment has directly interpreted Article 393 itself. However, secondary legal scholarship links it to judgments that affirm constitutional identity and supremacy: 1. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) 4 SCC 225 — Established the Basic Structure Doctrine; Article 393 is cited by scholars as underpinning the Constitution's unique sovereign identity that must be preserved. 2. S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994) 3 SCC 1 — Emphasized constitutional supremacy; the identity of the 'Constitution of India' as named in Article 393 symbolizes the sovereign authority every organ of the state must conform to. 3. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) 1 SCC 248 — Affirmed that no law or executive action can override the Constitution; the named document under Article 393 is the supreme law of the land. 4. Union of India v. Association for Democratic Reforms (2002) 5 SCC 294 — Held the Preamble represents the collective will of the people, a concept aligned with the declarative identity conferred by Article 393. NOTABLE DISSENTS (if any): None specific to Article 393. SCHOLARS & JURISTS: 1. GKToday / Constitutional commentators — Article 393 is declaratory and non-justiciable; it does not confer any rights or duties nor prescribe any procedure or power. 2. D.D. Basu (Commentary on the Constitution of India) — The short title clause follows standard legislative convention and serves as a formal identifier giving the Constitution its legal personality distinct from all prior enactments.