Part IV: Directive Principles of State Policy

Article 47: Duty of the State to raise the level of nutrition and improve public health

--- Original Article ---

The State shall regard the raising of the level of nutrition and the standard of living of its people and the improvement of public health as among its primary duties and, in particular, the State shall endeavour to bring about prohibition of the consumption except for medicinal purposes of intoxicating drinks and of drugs which are injurious to health.

Explanation

Article 47 of the Constitution mandates the State to prioritize the health and well-being of its citizens. This includes improving nutrition, raising living standards, and addressing public health concerns. A key aspect of this article is the State’s responsibility to prohibit intoxicating substances except for medicinal purposes.

Raising the Level of Nutrition

The State must strive to improve the nutrition levels of the population through targeted policies and programs aimed at reducing malnutrition and ensuring food security, particularly for vulnerable sections of society.

Improving the Standard of Living

Under Article 47, the State is obligated to implement policies that uplift the standard of living, focusing on equitable distribution of resources and access to basic services like sanitation, housing, and healthcare.

Enhancing Public Health

The State must take proactive steps to improve public health by investing in healthcare infrastructure, promoting awareness campaigns, and ensuring access to medical services. Large-scale public health initiatives are essential to fulfilling this directive.

Prohibition of Intoxicants

Article 47 directs the State to prohibit the consumption of intoxicating drinks and drugs, except for medicinal purposes, to safeguard public health and reduce the societal impact of substance abuse.

Amendments

No amendments have been made to Article 47. However, its application is reflected in various laws and public health policies implemented by state and central governments.

Real-Life Examples

• Mid-Day Meal Scheme: This initiative provides free meals to schoolchildren, addressing child malnutrition and promoting better nutrition among young students.
• Public Health Campaigns: Programs like Swachh Bharat Abhiyan and the National Health Mission aim to improve hygiene and healthcare access, fulfilling the objectives of Article 47.
• Prohibition of Alcohol and Drugs: States like Gujarat and Bihar have implemented alcohol prohibition laws, aligning with the directive to reduce substance abuse.

Historical Significance

Article 47 is rooted in India's post-independence vision of creating a welfare state. The article reflects the framers' awareness of the importance of nutrition and public health in nation-building, recognizing that these elements are critical for societal progress.

Legislative History

Article 38 of the Draft Constitution was discussed during the deliberations on November 23-24, 1948, and was later incorporated as Article 47 in the Constitution of India.

Debates and Deliberations

On November 24, 1948, the Constituent Assembly began the debate with Shri Mahavir Tyagi proposing an amendment to include the prohibition of intoxicating drinks and harmful drugs. Prof. Shibban Lal Saksena suggested an additional amendment, inserting the phrase "except for medicinal purposes," which Tyagi accepted. Prof. Saksena emphasized the financial and societal benefits of prohibition, estimating that approximately ₹100 crores would be saved for families, particularly those in labor and Harijan communities, if prohibition were implemented.

Shri B. H. Khardekar argued that prohibition would infringe on personal liberty, referencing the failure of prohibition in the U.S. and questioning its impact on societal progress. He also noted that prohibition might hinder the country’s economic priorities, such as education and public health.

Shri Jaipal Singh, representing tribal communities, also opposed prohibition, stating that it would interfere with tribal customs, particularly the use of rice beer in religious ceremonies. However, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar pointed to the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution, which ensures that prohibition laws would only apply to tribal areas with the consent of local councils.

Other members, such as Shri V. I. Muniswamy Pillai and The Honourable Shri B. G. Kher, supported the amendment, emphasizing the moral and social benefits of prohibition. They referenced Mahatma Gandhi's strong advocacy for prohibition and cited examples from the provinces of Madras and Bombay, where prohibition had reportedly improved public health and reduced crime.

Despite opposition, the amendment, as modified by Saksena and Ambedkar, was adopted, reinforcing the State's commitment to promoting prohibition while allowing certain exemptions for medicinal purposes.