‘India’ and ‘Bharat’ interchangeable, can be used in official invitation, say legal experts

There is ambivalence within the legal fraternity on whether a constitutional amendment is required for a change of name, after an official invitation described President Murmu as the “President of Bharat” triggered speculation that the Centre could officially change the name of “India” to “Bharat”

An official invitation from President Droupadi Murmu to G-20 guests in which she is described as the “President of Bharat” has triggered speculation that the Narendra Modi government could officially change the name of “India” to “Bharat” during the five-day-long Special Session of Parliament that starts on September 18.

While the issue has predictably sent political temperatures soaring, there is ambivalence within the legal fraternity on whether a constitutional amendment is required for a change of name.

Also read | Bharat vs India: one nation, two names

“The fact is that the terms Bharat and India can be used interchangeably, especially in view of the authorised Hindi version of the Indian Constitution, but the government cannot stipulate that everyone use only one name: either is permissible and usable interchangeably,” senior Supreme Court advocate and Congress member Abhishek Singhvi told The Hindu.

Mr. Singhvi, who is also a former Chairman of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Law and Justice, said an amendment would be required only if the government insisted on the use of any one term or wanted to remove a particular term.

Former Additional Solicitor-General and senior Supreme Court advocate Aman Lekhi said it was officially the “Republic of India” and even the G-20 Presidency was known as the “Indian Presidency”. He said that any change of name would require a constitutional amendment under Article 368.

“The change is possible but is it necessary? There are certain things that should be free of controversy and the name of the country should highest in that list,” Mr. Lekhi said.