This refers to the article, “A relook at the Constitution” (March 20) by Prafull Goradia. The writer has raised certain valid points about the unrepresentative nature of the Constituent Assembly. In this connection, it would be worthwhile to recall that the said Constituent Assembly was formed on the recommendations of the Cabinet Mission that visited India in 1946 and its first meeting was held on December 9, 1946 — much before the decision to Partition of India was taken.
Moreover, the formation of the Constituent Assembly was based on the elections that were held in 1946 for an undivided India. These elections were not held on the basis of adult franchise, as has been adopted by India after Independence. They were held only from the elite class. How can such a body be called the true representative of millions of Indians of the newly formed IndiaIJ
Would it not have been proper if such an important body was formed on the basis of fresh elections with adult franchise in the newly formed state after the Partition of the country and merger of princely StatesIJ After all, India had agreed for the dominion status and the Government of India Act, 1935, was in place for the interim period. Is it, therefore, not prudent to have a relook at the ConstitutionIJ