Supreme Court adjourns plea which sought to officially rename 'India' as 'Bharat'

The Supreme Court on Tuesday has adjourned its hearing on a petition which sought to change the name of the country from 'India' to "Bharat", without giving any next date. Chief Justice of India SA Bobde, who was slated to hear the matter, was on leave on Tuesday, and hence the matter was adjourned by the top court.

READ | Vizag Gas Leak: NGT panel submits report; highlights massive negligence of LG management

Details of the plea

The PIL was filed by an individual named Namah. In this plea, the petitioner - Namah - has sought enforcement of the fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution which entitles every citizen equal right to call his or her own country as 'Bharat'. Moreover, he had contended that the Union Government has failed to do away with the symbol of slavery by using the name ‘India’ instead of Bharat or Hindustan. He has also pointed out to the many pleas which have sought the same and the government's inaction to do so, justifying his reason to approach the apex court.

READ | Congress' Randeep Surjewala approaches Supreme Court over migrant crisis with urgent plea

SC rejects PIL to rename India

In March 2016, the Supreme Court had dismissed a petition seeking renaming of India as Bharat. Reacting to the absurdity of the plea, the bench of Justices TS Thakur and UU Lalit had asked, "Do you think we have no other work except dealing with emotional issues?”. It further admonished the petitioner - Niranjan Bhatwal, a Maharashtra-based social activist stating, "Help the poor through the PIL jurisdiction. If you want to call it Bharat, do so. Nobody is stopping you".

READ | PM Modi lists '5Is' to bring India back on path of rapid growth in economic revival pitch

Prior to this order, an SC bench led by then Chief Justice HL Dattu had sought responses of the Centre, states and Union Territories on Bhatwal’s PIL in April 2016. Bhatwal had argued that the Constituent Assembly had originally conceived and adopted Bharat as the official name. He had sought clarification on the phrase — “India, that is, Bharat shall be a Union of States” — used in Article 1 of the Indian Constitution.

READ | Uttar Pradesh: CM Adityanath to sign MoU on employment for migrants, 11.5 lakhs to benefit

He had stated in his petition that  ‘India’ is not a literal translation of the word ‘Bharata’. Besides the country, both historically and in the Scriptures, is known as ‘Bharata’, as per reports. Moreover, he stated that with the phrase - 'India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States', codified Bharat’ name for the Republic of India'. After receiving no response from the Centre on the matter, the petitioner reportedly moved the Supreme Court.