Previous Year Question
With reference to the federal system in India, which of the statements is/are correct?
States have no right to secede from the Union under the Constitution of India.
Just advocacy of secession will have the protection of freedom of expression.
Select the correct answer from the codes given below:
1 only
2 only
Both 1 and 2
Neither 1 nor 2
Correct Answer: A
Detailed Solution
Statement 1 is correct. Article 1 declares India to be a “Union of States.” The Constitution does not confer upon a State a unilateral constitutional right to secede from the Union. On the contrary, Article 3 empowers Parliament in matters relating to the formation of new States and alteration of the areas, boundaries and names of existing States.
Thus, the Indian federation is not structured as an agreement among constituent States carrying a constitutional right to withdraw from the Union.
Statement 2 is incorrect. Article 19(1)(a) guarantees freedom of speech and expression, but this freedom is not absolute. Article 19(2) permits the State to impose reasonable restrictions in the interests of the “sovereignty and integrity of India.” Hence, the proposition that advocacy of secession will necessarily receive constitutional protection as freedom of expression is incorrect.
The 16th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1963 is particularly relevant here. It inserted “sovereignty and integrity of India” as a constitutional ground for restrictions under Articles 19(2), 19(3) and 19(4).
This should not be read as meaning that every statement automatically constitutes an offence; rather, Statement 2 is incorrect because it claims unconditional free-speech protection, whereas Article 19(2) expressly permits constitutionally valid restrictions in this field.