As of July 2014, the constitution has 448 articles, 25 parts, 12 schedules, and 120 amendments. The original 479 page calligraphic edition signed by all the framers is preserved in a helium filled case by Parliament.
The Constitution as it stands today, is the result of heated discussion and long debates carried over thousands of amendments moved by the honourable Members of this House. In fact there is not a single word in the Constitution which has not received the notice of some Member or the other. I can go to the length of stating that even punctuations, viz., comma, semicolon, and full stops, have received due notice.
-- Ram Chandra Gupta (UP)
Why Juries are not used in India? An endnote on the Legal System
Although not directly related to the drafting of the Constitution, I would also end this chapter with a brief overview of the Indian legal system.
India follows the Common Law system of Britain that enables the courts to create laws while passing key judgments. In parallel, there were also processes to codify the criminal laws more clearly. In 1860, after much debate, colonial England decided to change India's laws introducing the Indian Penal Code. It was essential as the Crown wanted to have a reasonably fair system to calm the nation after the revolt of 1857. The Indian penal code was then applied in a wide span of land from Nigeria to Singapore.
In most countries following the common law, there is also a provision of juries. These are people selected from the common public who hear the various arguments and pronounce a defendant as guilty or not guilty.
However, in the landmark KM Nanavati v State of Maharashtra case, the court finally struck down the jury system.
On April 27, 1959 a popular naval commander shot dead his wife’s lover. The question before the court was whether the murder was premeditated or not.
The public rallied in his support (given how conservative India was then) and the jury decided it was not premeditated murder. Later, the Supreme court found the jury to be too influenced by the media leading them to make erroneous judgments. This case proved to be final straw against the jury system in the young democracy.
While people’s opinions are to be respected, various thought leaders worried about the fickleness of public opinion that can often make the system hot-headed, unstable and vindictive. Whether outlawing the jury system or adding even more checks on the Parliament, various thought leaders sought to prevent the public from shooting themselves on the foot.
* * *
Chapter 3: Reorganizing India
I do believe that we should hurry up with the reorganization of linguistic provinces.
-- Mahatma Gandhi (October 10, 1947)
The main advantage of the scheme of Linguistic Provinces which appeals to me quite strongly is that Linguistic Provinces would make democracy work better than it would in mixed Provinces.
-- BR Ambedkar (1948)
Our great provincial languages are no dialects or vernaculars, as the ignorant sometimes call them. They are ancient languages with a rich inheritance, each spoken by many millions of people, each tied up inextricably with the life and culture and ideas of the masses as well as the upper classes.
-- Pandit Nehru (1937)
August 15, 2011
Hyderabad I was visiting my relatives in Hyderabad. I have a large extended family in the city. The movement to create a new state of Telangana was at its peak as the activists moved for a final push.
It was a confusing time as it looked like Telangana might be ending what Andhra Pradesh had started in 1953 - reorganizing India on the lines of language. As India's 29th new state entered on June 2, 2014, it is not clear whether that fear would hold.
India was a land of 1,600 languages. After Patel welded India it was a hodgepodge of provinces that were organized not by language or culture, but by the historic conveniences of its rulers.
Nehru had a vision of one India, speaking one language. In 1947, he underestimated the people's passions towards their regional languages, although in 1937 he exhibited a remarkable understanding of the problem.
The remarkably prescient Mahatma Gandhi, however, begged to differ. The Congressional party was built on communication through these regional languages and if Mahatma Gandhi could unite India, while writing primarily in Gujarati and English, there was no reason why India could not be a single nation with dozens of regional languages. For almost a decade, Nehru fought against a linguistic organization of states, but in 1956 he relented.
The linguistic reorganization was one of the bold experiments and it worked great. It strengthened India by enabling strong states and weakening the many separatist movements (that wanted to separate fearing India's imposition of one culture). It is extremely rare to see a strong nation where each state spoke a different language. India pulled off a miracle.
* * *
The provinces of India
At the time of independence India's first main task was to give some order to the hodgepodge of the territories India inherited from the British. It was a mammoth task as the British didn't directly rule a big chunk of India.
However, India was incredibly lucky to have Vallabhai Patel. He grouped the variety of territories into three buckets. These were the three types of states that were recognized by our constitution in 1950:
Governor Ruled: Former provinces of British India - West Bengal, Madras, Bombay, Central Provinces, United Provinces, Orissa, and Punjab.
Rajpramukh Ruled: Groups of princely states united by Patel - Hyderabad, Travancore, Kashmir, Saurashtra, Patiala, Mysore, Madhya Bharat, and Rajasthan.
Chief Commissioner Ruled: Small territories that were in between: Ajmer, Bhopal, Himachal, Coorg, Manipur, Tripura, Bilaspur, Kutch, Delhi, and Vindhya Pradesh.
None of these states were formed on linguistic lines. Various leaders starting from Mahatma Gandhi advocated a linguistic organization, but after the death of Mahatma Gandhi his advice was lost in thin air. However, 5 years after Mahatma’s death, the goal of linguistically-organized states would materialize.
Part 1: Potti Sreeramulu Sets the Ball Rolling
You will observe that we have disturbed the hornet’s nest and I believe most of us are likely to be badly stung.
-- Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru (1953)
In 1947, the province of Madras was a sprawling one that included its people speaking four different languages - Kannada, Telugu, Malayalam, and Tamil. However, the political control mainly resided with the Tamils - with two Tamil leaders, Kamaraj and Rajagopalachari (Rajaji), having a national level influence.
The problem came to a fore in 1947 when Kamaraj forced T. Prakasam (a Telugu speaker) to resign after he was elected as the Chief Minister of Madras. Three Chief Ministers were changed from 1947-52 as Kamaraj showed power to play politics. At that time the Madras Congressional party was divided into four factions:
Rajaji's unit - this had a lot of support from Brahmins - especially Tamil Brahmins.
Kamaraj's unit - this had a big control over Tamil Nadu's non-Brahmins.
T. Prakasam's unit - this had a big influence over the Telugu group.
Pattabhi Sitaramayya's unit - this had a big influence over Telugu Brahmins.
The non-Congressional parties, especially the Dravida Kazhagam, was also split with Annadurai wrestling control over the movement by forming a separate party of Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK).
It was in this context that the state elections of 1951 were conducted. With such a fractious split, no one was able to form a government. The Congressional party finally brought Rajaji out of his retirement after he had been in India's highest position of Governor General. Rajaji successfully mended the differences in the coalition. However, many Telugu people were still disturbed at the perceived dominance of Tamils.
The Andhra movement was earlier subdued by the "JVP Committee" comprised of Jawaharlal Nehru, Vallabhai Patel, and Pattabhi Sitaramayya. Let down both by the central government as well as Andhra Congress groups, some of the Andhra supporters were frus
trated.
In 1952 an ex-freedom fighter, Potti Sreeramulu, wanted to take the Gandhian route. He was an engineer educated from the famous VJTI of Bombay who came to the Gandhian movement after losing his wife and only child during a failed delivery. He took part in various fasts to get more rights for India's downtrodden Dalits.
On the 19th of October 1952, he would start his last fast in the city of Madras. India's leadership didn't relent. On the 58th day of the fast, Sreeramulu died. His death sparked wide riots. Within three days of his death on the 19th of December, Nehru announced the creation of a state for the Telugu people. The first linguistically organized state was born.
Fight for Madras
After the Telugus got their state, the fight shifted to the ownership of Madras - the largest city of the south. For centuries, Madras had cultural influences of both the Tamils and Telugus. While the temples that dot the city were primarily Tamil, many of the prominent citizens since 17th century were Telugu. A proposal to partition the city along the river Cooum was put to the table.
For both sides this was a crucial battle. Telugus rallied with the slogan - Madras Manade. Tamils countered with a slogan - Madras Namade (both meaning "Madras is ours" in their respective languages). Nehru appointed the Wachoo Commission to decide on this and the Commission favored an unequivocal inclusion of Madras in the Tamil province - given the population demographics.
An agreement was offered that in return for Telugus dropping their fight for Madras, the Tamil groups decided to drop the demand for Chittor (with the famous temple of Tirupati). Finally, in October 1953, the new state of Andhra Pradesh was formed with Kurnool as the capital.
The Pandora's box was now wide open. Soon, everyone else started to ask for their own state based on their language.
Part 2: West and South Get Altered
Lathi goli khayenge, phir bhi Bambai layenge.
(We will eat bullets and sticks. But, we will still stick to Bombay.)
-- slogan of Maharashtra protesters fighting for Bombay.
Like the Andhrites, the Marathis have long fought for a separate state. The powers of the Bombay Presidency primarily centered around the Gujaratis. Gujaratis were rich, powerful, and better organized. Similar demand came from elsewhere in India.
The central government commissioned a body of experts under the State Reorganization Commission under the leadership of Fazal Ali. The group traveled all over India taking over 15,000 written submissions over a course of three years. In 1956, the modern states were formed on linguistic lines through the landmark States Reorganization Act.
The main change was in the south and west.
The Kannada speaking parts of Bombay state, Madras state, and Hyderabad state were merged to form Karnataka.
Andhra Pradesh was further enlarged with the addition of Telugu-speaking parts of Hyderabad.
Madras and Travancore-Cochin provinces exchanged districts to form the Malayalam-speaking Kerala and the Tamil-speaking Madras state.
The Hindi-speaking parts of central India were united to create Madhya Pradesh.
Marathi-speaking parts of Central Provinces and Hyderabad were added to Bombay.
In the north, the princely states grouped under Patiala and East Punjab States Union (PEPSU) merged with Punjab. Small Bengali speaking parts of Bihar were merged with West Bengal. However, the Commission refused to change the boundaries in the North East or give a separate state for the Sikhs and Maharashtrians.
Fight for Bombay
In Maharashtra, there was a fight for Bombay similar to the Madras fight. The city was almost evenly divided between the Gujaratis and Marathis, while the surrounding areas were primarily Marathi. The Commission had initially recommended for a joint ownership of the city.
However, violence erupted and the police fought with brutality. Nehru didn't give in and neither did the protesters. On May 1, 1960 the Indian government finally relented and the new states of Maharashtra and Gujarat were created with Bombay going to Maharashtra.
Part 3: North and North East Get Altered
The partition of India left a lot of unfinished business. The Sikhs were among the worst affected in the process and they yearned for a separate state - the Punjabi Suba. In the state of Punjab, they were a minority with just a third of the population. Similarly, in the North East, a lot of dissimilar tribes were grouped into a single province of Assam merely for administrative convenience. Both were to change.
Nehru was worried about the creation of states on religious grounds as the wounds of the creation of Pakistan hurt him. Thus, he ignored the activism of Master Tara Singh (a Sikh convert from Hinduism, who also cofounded Vishwa Hindu Parishad) who was fighting for a Sikh majority state.
Entry of Indira
On January 24, 1966, Indira Gandhi became the third Prime Minister of India. She didn't carry the baggage and wounds of Nehru. In the just concluded 1965 war with Pakistan, Sikhs were among the biggest demographic groups in the Indian Army. Indira's government thus wanted to reward the Sikhs and on November 1, 1966, the state of Punjab was trifurcated.
The Sikhs got the state of Punjab with the holy city of Amritsar at the center.
The Hindus speaking the Haryanvi dialects were grouped to form the state of Haryana.
The Hindus speaking the Pahari dialects and hill tribes got the state of Himachal Pradesh.
Northeast Reorganization 1971
Another war with Pakistan. This time the war was in the east (to split Pakistan and create Bangladesh) and coincidentally the reorganization was also in the east.
The state of Assam was divided into six units - with the creation of the new states of Tripura, Meghalaya, and Manipur and union territory status for Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh. Eventually, Mizoram and Arunachal also became full states.
Part 4: Push for Smaller States
In 2000, the BJP government pushed for smaller states to address the development problems in India's large interior states - Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh Chhattisgarh, Uttaranchal, and Jharkhand were created out of larger states.
These states were carved without much issues and might have been the reason for a faster growth of the region since 2000. BJP had always sought for manageable governance units. Even after the division, the state of Uttar Pradesh has more people than Russia, Canada, Australia, and Kazakhstan - four of world's nine largest countries by area - combined. Effective governance demands more manageable units than this.
Part 5: Telangana Gets Created
On June 2, 2014, India had its 29th state (and the last new state at the time of this writing) formed out of the Hyderabad Nizam's provinces in Andhra Pradesh. For the activists of a United Andhra Pradesh, this was a slap in the face of Potti Sriramulu. For the activists of Telangana, this was a new beginning of their socioeconomic interests.
Since this was the most controversial of the state divisions (fought for more than 50 years) I will get into some detail on the pros and cons.
Bad
Education. Andhra Pradesh suffers the most as their people are already feeling the brunt of the backlash in Hyderabad. Close to half of erstwhile AP's top engineering colleges are in Telangana. Apart from losing these colleges, AP students have now lost their domicile status in many of the private colleges. For a few years there will be a backlash against their admissions. Until new colleges are built in AP, there will be increased hardships for students and their careers. Especially for the Costas, higher education is a very important issue.
Water. I'm from the Kaveri delta and I can tell you what happens if you are a victim of water disputes. The river that once supported the great civilization of Cholas is quite dry and a great region is blighted due to the water wars with Karnataka after the Madras state was divided in the 1950s. I hope the same doesn't happen to the Krishna/Godavari delta given that Telangana now controls the water. As Telangana develops more, dams will be built and water will start to get diverted out of the delta.
Emotional battles. As AP s
tarts moving to their fourth capital since independence, emotions will run high. They have been made strangers in their own capital. Hopefully, GOI presses enough on the new Telangana government to treat all Indian citizens the same.
Finances. People from all parts of AP put all their eggs in Hyderabad and make the city generate half of the undivided state's revenues. Now, when they lose Hyderabad there will be strain on the state's finances that will curtail many development projects.
Good
Better governance. Small states have in general been good for India. The previous division of states (such as Punjab-Haryana, UP-Uttarakhand, and Bihar-Jharkhand) have all been quite successful. Telangana would be able to prioritize its own issues (such as primary education and building an industrial base) while Andhra could aim for rapid development in the services and food sector given that it has a lot of developed districts.
Telangana has a historic opportunity. Millions of poor Indians live in land locked states like Telangana. So far, their needs have been ignored. Now they have water, engineering colleges, revenue bases, and thus no longer have an excuse to not develop.
Faster development. Telangana could now grow fast as they now have the resources. Andhra could grow faster due to the separation.
Well-rounded development. People from all parts of AP invested too much in Hyderabad and too little in Guntur, Rajahmundry, or Nellore. The painful lesson should make everyone in India realize the need for more rounded development instead of putting too much on our metros. The Andhra people will move with a renewed vigor to develop a new capital along with 10 tier-two cities and this will be good for everyone in India.
From Tryst to Tendulkar: The History of Independent India Page 7
