Uproar in House over Hindi, Sanskrit names for new Bills

Sub: Polity

Sec: Constitution

Context:

Opposition MPs in Parliament have sharply criticized the government’s use of Hindi and Sanskrit names for new laws, accusing it of Hindi imposition and breaching Constitutional requirements.
The debate was sparked by the Bharatiya Vayuyan Vidheyak (Indian Aircraft Bill).

Opposition’s arguments:

Potential violation of Article 348 (1B) of the Indian Constitution, which mandates that the authoritative text of laws should be in English.
Some MPs claimed that it amounted to Hindi imposition and violated the federal principles of India by disregarding linguistic diversity.
They argued that nearly 60% of India’s population speaks non-Hindi languages, and naming Bills in Hindi or Sanskrit excludes large sections of the population who do not understand these languages.
They also highlighted difficulties in pronouncing Hindi titles of Bills, questioning why the government would use Hindi names with English script.

Government’s defence:

Government has accused the opposition of displaying a colonial-era mindset, arguing that the use of Hindi names for Bills was a reflection of India’s cultural pride and heritage.
The term “Bharatiya” (Indian) and “Vayu” (air) are words familiar across multiple Indian languages, including Telugu, and thus the name reflects the linguistic diversity of India.

Constitution

Article 348(1) of the Constitution of India provides that all proceedings in the Supreme Court and in every High Court shall be in English language until Parliament by law otherwise provides.
Article 348 (2) provides that the Governor of the State may, with the previous consent of the President, authorize the use of the Hindi language or any other language used for any official purpose of the State, in the proceedings of the High Court having its principal seat in that State provided that decrees, judgments or orders passed by such High Courts shall be in English. The Official Language Act, 1963 reiterates this and provides under Section 7 that the use of Hindi or official language of a State in addition to the English language may be authorized, with the consent of the President of India, by the Governor of the State for the purpose of judgments, decrees etc. made by the High Court for that State. No law has been made in this regard by the Parliament so far. Therefore, English continues to be the language for all the proceedings of the Supreme Court.

Key issues in the debate:

The debate revolves around the diverse linguistic landscape of India, with 22 officially recognized languages and numerous dialects. The government’s use of Hindi and Sanskrit names for laws has raised concerns about marginalizing non-Hindi speakers.
Article 348 (1B) requires that the authoritative text of laws be in English, but the question arises whether naming a Bill in Hindi or Sanskrit violates this provision, particularly when the text of the Bill remains in English.