New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday disposed of a petition seeking directions to rename the country from "India" to "Bharat" or "Hindustan".
Disposing of the plea, the court directed the petitioner to send a copy of his writ petition as representation to the concerned ministry(s) which will decide the representation appropriately.
While declining to entertain the plea, the top court said the petition could be considered as a representation to the government.
A bench headed by the CJI and comprising Justices A.S. Bopanna and Hrishikesh Roy asked the petitioner's counsel, "Why have you come here? India is already called Bharat in the Constitution."
Advocate Ashwin Vaish, appearing for the Delhi-based petitioner, argued that the plea seeked amendment to Article 1 of the Constitution.
To which, the CJI replied, "We can't do that."
He reiterated that India is already called Bharat in the Constitution. Vaish argued that the English name India did not represent the culture and tradition of the country; instead, its origin is Greek, and it is derived from the word 'Indica'.
Vaish said that historically there are many examples where 'Bharat Mata ki Jai' was used, and urged the top court to allow him to make a representation before the appropriate ministries. The top court said that this particular petition be treated as a representation by the Centre.
Read: Can govt confirm that no Chinese soldiers entered India: Rahul
The plea claimed that this will ensure citizens of the country to get over the colonial past and instill a sense of pride in the nationality.
The petitioner argued that the time is ripe to recognise the country by its original and authentic name 'Bharat', especially when the cities have been renamed in accordance with Indian ethos.
The plea said, "The removal of the English name though appears symbolic, will instill a sense of pride in our nationality, especially for the future generations. In fact, the word India being replaced with Bharat would justify the hard fought freedom achieved by our ancestors."
This is not the first time that such petitions have been filed before the Supreme Court. While a notice was issued in one such petition, another was dismissed by the top court citing the same reasons given today.
(With inputs from agencies)
