The Many Names of One Country: Must We Consider Changing India’s Name to Bharat?

Must Read

The Right to Information and its Working of 15 years

On 12th October 2020, RTI finished fifteen years since its commencement. The question remains whether the legislation stands up to...

An Insight into Custodial Death in India

“The occurrence of Custodial deaths in the world’s greatest democracy has raised the eyebrows of every citizen and shaken...

Implications in Travel Insurance in Light of the COVID-19 Crisis

As the world, today is crippled by this once in a century pandemic and as of date more than...

Second-Round Effects of Rent Control Laws: The Argentine Case

Introduction In colonial India, a city had an issue with its cobra population, which was a problem clearly in need...

Why Are the Big Techs of Silicon Valley Accused of Anti-Competitive Behaviours?

The big tech giants of the Silicon Valley are facing major challenges with relation to their monopolistic powers after...

KSK announces Sanjay Kumar as a Partner for Pharma & Life Sciences Practice

New Partner for KSK's Pharma & Life Sciences Practice King Stubb & Kasiva recently announced that Mr Sanjay Kumar has...

Follow us

Centuries ago, Shakespeare used the phrase “What’s in a name?” in his famous play Romeo and Juliet. This adage implies that the name of a thing doesn’t matter as much as the qualities possessed by it. Further, ever since Shakespeare penned it, the phrase gained global recognition and stood the test of time. But, a few days back it failed to hold good in India when the very name of the country was challenged. This happened when a petition was filed before the Supreme Court of India, to amend the name of the country. The proposed name change is from India to Bharat or Hindustan.

The Issue

The Supreme Court bench headed by the CJI dealt with the petition filed from Delhi. The petition revolved around seeking directions by the Hon’ble SC for the central government to amend Article 1 of the constitution. Further, it aimed to change the official name of the country from India to Bharat or Hindustan.

The Court Proceeding

Advocate Ashwin Vaish, on behalf of the petitioner, stated that the public direly needs such an amendment. This is especially due to the history of this country. He further contended that the English name fails to represent the culture and tradition of the nation. This is because it has a Greek origin and reminds people of the years of slavery faced by the country. Hence, it is imperative to change its name to Bharat.

Changing the name would help instil a sense of patriotism and pride among the citizens. The counsel relied on the recent amendments in the names of certain states as per Indian ethos. He argued the need to recognize the country by its original and authentic name ‘Bharat’.

Replying to the contention, the bench stated “Why have you come here? India is already called Bharat in the Constitution under Article 1.” The court highlighted that the Constituent assembly has already debated on this issue. As it was after heated debates that “India that is Bharat” found its place in the Constitution.

Further dismissing the petition, the court held that the plea could be treated as a representation to the government. There is nothing else that the Court could do in this case.

What are the Different Names of India?

India is among the few countries that the world knows for its glorious past. Article 1 of the Constitution of India states, “India, that is Bharat, will be a union of states.” Jawaharlal Nehru in his work ‘Discovery of India’ penned down the different names of the nation. These included India, Bharata, Hindustan, etc.

Four years after he published the book, the Constitution came into force. Apart from these three names, there are several other nomenclatures used across the point of time to describe this South Asian Subcontinent. These nomenclatures changed with time and include names like as below:

Meluha 

This is the oldest name of the nation per the ancient Mesopotamian literature. It owes its origin to the Indus Valley Civilization.

Aryavarta 

The Manu Smriti used this word to name the nation. It was dominant during the Indo-Aryan Civilization.

Bharat

This name is among the two names the constitution recognises. It found popularity during India’s struggle for independence by way of phrases like ‘BHARAT MATA KI JAI.’

Hindustan/Hind

Darius, the Persian ruler, described the land across the Sindhu River as ‘Sindh’. The Persians later changed this to Hind, as Persians pronounce letter ‘s’ as ‘h’. Darius called this subcontinent as the land of Hind or Hindustan. The two words ‘Hind’ and ‘Sthan’ thus gave rise to Hindustan.

India

Alexander added a Greek touch to the word ‘Hind’. Greeks often take ‘h’ to be silent in their vocabulary and thus everything that had a prefix ‘hind’ changed to ‘Ind’. This gave us the present name of India.

Apart from these names, some other prominent nomenclatures used for present India included, Jambudvipa, Dravida, Nabhivarsa, etc.

The Debate Behind the Name of Independent India?

Owing to the myriad names held by the nation, the debate while finalizing the name of independent India was sure to take place. Post-independence, Dr B.R. Ambedkar chaired the Constituent Assembly. The committee went for elongated discussions on each article before finalizing the constitution. When the matter of article 1, dealing with the ‘name and territory of the union’ took place before the house, the views stood divided.

How is Article 1 Interpreted? 

Article 1 of the Constitution states – “India, that is Bharat will be a union of states.” Many members of the assembly opposed the proposed wordings. They provided the following alternatives:

Shri H.V. KAMATH suggested amending the first article. It should state, ‘Bharat, or in the English language, India will be and such’. For this, he placed reliance on the Irish Free State, which changed its name to represent its authenticity.

HARI GOVIND PANT represented the hill districts and expressed on their behalf the desire to call India “Bharatvarsha and nothing else”.

SETH GOVIND DAS proposed changing the article to “Bharat known as India also in foreign countries”. He further stated that-

“Naming has always been and is even today of great significance in our country. India, that is, Bharat are not beautiful words for, the name of a country. We should have put the words Bharat known as India also in foreign countries. That would have been much more appropriate than the former expression. We should, however, at least have the satisfaction that we are today giving to our country the name of Bharat.”

But, the committee accepted none of the suggestions given by the members. During a vote on the question of amendment in Article 1, the House stood at 38 Ayes and 51 Noes. Thus the amendment was negatived.

Author’s Note

After more than 73 years of independence, the debate over the name of the nation still stands strong. On the international front, many countries got rid of their past. They changed their names to represent their traditional identity. These include Ceylon to Sri Lanka; Burma to Myanmar; Spanish East Indies to the Philippines; New Spain to Mexico; etc. Indeed, India is not the original name of this country and has a foreign past. Further, the name Bharat finds acceptance in our National Anthem, Freedom Slogans, etc.

Thus, it is now for the Central Government to decide the fate of the representation.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

Latest News

Privy Council Clarifies Approach To Winding up in “Deadlock” Cases in the Case of Chu v. Lau

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council clarified several aspects of the law concerning just and equitable winding-up petitions, as well as shareholder disputes...

Madras High Court Directs Hospital To Submit Necessary Medical Reports to Authorization Committee for Approval of Kidney Transplant

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a Writ of Mandamus to K.G. Hospital, Coimbatore by P. Sankar & V. Sobana....

Punjab Woman Evokes Petition for Protection Fearing Honour Killing

In the case of Divya Mattu and another vs State of Punjab and others, the petitioner, Divya, fearing honour killing against her by her...

Punjab Woman Accuses Punjab Police of Keeping Husband in Illegal Custody and Framing Him in a False Case

In the case of Geeta v the State of Punjab, the petitioner evoked a writ petition of habeas corpus as she claimed that her...

Addition of Words as Prefixes or Suffixes Is an Infringement of a Registered Trademark: Delhi High Court

Justice Jayanth Nath allowed the Times Group to use its registered trademark “Newshour”, in the case of Bennett Coleman and Co. Ltd v. ARG Outlier...

Just Because the Deceased Did Not Have License, Does Not Imply He Was Negligent: Chhattisgarh High Court

In the case of Hemlal & Others v. Dayaram & Others, a Single Bench of Chhattisgarh High Court consisting of Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal annunciated various...

Hoardings Are Movable Property Under Section 2(3) of DMC Act Subject To the Twin Test: Delhi High Court

Delhi High Court in the case of Delhi International Airport v South Delhi Metropolitan Corporation discussed in detail the provision under Section 2(3) of the DMC...

State Cannot Issue Directions on Rate of Charge of Non-COVID Patients in Private Hospitals: Bombay High Court

On 23rd October 2020, the Nagpur Bench of Bombay High court at Nagpur, consisting of Justice R.K. Deshpande and Justice Pushpa V. Ganediwala gave...

UAPA Cannot Be Used When the Accused Does Not Have an Active Knowledge of the Offence: Delhi High Court

Justice Suresh Kumar Kait held that the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act cannot be charged on the accused when he does not have any knowledge...

US Court Orders Iran To Pay $1.4 BN in Damages To Missing Former FBI Agent’s Family

The United States District Court for the District of Columbia ordered Iran to pay in total $1.45 bn to the Levinson family in punitive...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -