Constitutions are documents which govern the functioning of the state. They usually operate in a model where they broadly serve three functions: laying down both horizontal and vertical distribution of powers among different state functionaries; ensuring the balance of power between the state, individual and communities; laying down an overarching moral framework, which guides the day-to-day operation of the state, as well as the interpretation of the Constitution in times of conflict. Today, the discourse about the Indian Constitution seems to be overshadowed by the general sentiment of contempt against the constitutional structure. It is seen as either too restrictive for the exercise of majoritarian state power, or as an obsolete text having little contemporary relevance. Many, including myself, being strong believers of Hanlon’s Razor – which argues that what can be explained by stupidity should not be attributed to malice – believe that this contempt usually stems from a position of ignorance.Written by Tarunabh Khaitan and Surbhi Karwa, this collection of nine essays in Hindi seeks to simplify nine important aspects of the Indian Constitution, freeing it from legal jargon as far as practicable, and serves the core political-moral compass, or the ‘spirit’ of the Constitution, on a platter for readers without legal background. It makes an important intervention in the gap where the Constitution, although available publicly, could not be understood in its spirit since it requires a systematic reading of several lengthy cases where judges expand on the nuances of the law – important for the development of jurisprudence, but severely inaccessible to almost every reader who is not a lawyer. The added advantage of the book being written in Hindi, without resorting to the Hindi legal jargon, is that it seeks to speak to an audience that is different from your average urban, college-going book reader; and that other languages can hugely benefit from its translations. It is noteworthy that such an unprecedented degree of accessibility has not led to a compromise on academic rigour or the erasure of necessary nuance and tension, which one would expect from a discussion over constitutional law.Since it is neither feasible nor desirable to give an overview of the whole book in a review, I seek to discuss briefly what I felt were the most remarkable interventions. The Preamble, the making of the Constitution and directive principles The first essay deals with the importance of the Preamble and seeks to clarify some commonly held misconceptions about the Constitution’s identity. The authors also talk about the major foundational goals of the Constitution – those which found their mention in the original draft, as well as those that didn’t. The most interesting aspect is how the debate around the addition of ‘socialist’ and ‘secular’, to the Constitution is treated. The chapter makes a beautiful, three-pronged argument. First, it explains that the Constitution was secular and socialist from the inception in the way that it was understood by the makers.Second, it highlights that the hue and cry around ‘socialist’ and ‘secular’ does not extend to the other modifications in the Preamble carried out in the same amendment — “unity and integrity of the Nation” – thereby making it clear that the opposition to the first set of terms is not really an innocent cry. Finally, it also highlights the fact that the Congress party’s 42nd Amendment, which inserted those words, was soon followed by the 44th Amendment by the next Janta Party government, which undid most of the 42nd Amendment and yet chose to retain the inclusions in the Preamble, showing a clear, cross-party support for the said inclusions.The second essay, which deals with the Constitution-making process and the Directive Principles of State Policy (“DPSP”), examines the historical context of the process, in the light of the conflict between the Fundamental Rights (Part III) and the DPSPs (Part IV). Using the principle of liberalism as an anchor, the essay discusses the idea of ‘building a consensus’ in a constituent process. It posits that the makers of the constitution settled on a set of non-negotiable values that are placed in Part III; and then another list that comprises aspirational goals – which the makers (or a sub-set thereof) see as having value, while recognising the importance of democratic deliberation as and when the time arises – is placed in Part IV.The portrayal of the constitution-making process as, inter alia, an exercise of determining whether something should belong to Part III or IV, promotes the reader to imagine the constituent process of deliberation, as well as understand why the rights in Part III are supposed to be treated as being relatively non-negotiable.Democracy, religion and citizenshipThe seventh essay, which deals with democracy and the electoral system, is a similarly enriching explanation of the first-principles behind the electoral system. Beginning with a preliminary introduction to the ‘first past the post’ (FPTP) and ‘proportional representation’ (PR) systems and weighing their respective pros-and-cons, the authors, after necessary deliberation, suggest a shift to the preferential ranking system for the Parliamentary and state assembly elections in India.It is noteworthy that between an atmosphere of discussion around electoral best-practices, electoral funding, one-nation-one-election, ‘vote-chori’ etc., there is a dearth of discussion on the fundamentals of the electoral process, the goals sought to be achieved, and whether the method being adopted is the most suited for the fulfilment of such goals. This essay contemplates a shift to the FPTP system of elections in India, which most certainly deserves more meaningful consideration in the legal academia as well as in the political and parliamentary circles.Lastly, the ninth and final essay, which deals with the politics of religion and citizenship, touches upon the historic context of citizenship. It discusses how nationality is not the same as citizenship, though nationality has been one of the criteria alongside language while considering citizenship in post-industrial, print-age Europe. Further, the authors delve into the contemporarily relevant discussion on ‘who is a citizen’: building upon jus soli (citizenship based on soil or land) and jus sanguinis (citizenship based on blood, or ancestry). The authors point out that Partition of the subcontinent, and the mass displacement that followed, was one of the important factors which shaped the understanding of citizenship for the constitution-makers.While the predominant opinion was to have a jus soli citizenship, the aftermath of Partition led to some elements of jus sanguinis also being incorporated – however, even such incorporation had nothing to do with religion or race. However, the authors point out that since the Parliament has been empowered to make (and hence also amend) laws relating to citizenship, there has been a gradual shift away from the jus soli predominance, towards a more jus sanguinis understanding, which reflects in the Citizenship (Amendment) Act of 2019, and that the exclusion of Muslim refugees therefrom is a clear violation of not just our Constitutional understanding of citizenship, but also the Constitutional guarantee of equality (Article 14).An essential readThis collection of essays demonstrates how constitutional principles affect everyday governance, from local administration to national policy-making. This practical orientation helps readers connect abstract constitutional concepts with tangible governmental processes, fulfilling the book’s stated goal of enabling citizens to assess whether the Constitution is truly in danger or not. This also distinguishes the work from purely academic treatments, positioning it as a necessary continuation of, and a refresher to, high school civics that often gets lost in the overemphasis on mathematics and sciences.The book’s primary strength lies in its balanced, analytical approach. Rather than engaging in constitutional hagiography or apocalyptic warnings, the authors present nuanced assessments that acknowledge both the Constitution’s achievements and its limitations. This scholarly restraint enhances the work’s educational value.The authors argue that the Constitution of India exists on two separate levels: one is the higher, aspirational level which requires to be protected and preserved; and second, an operational or pragmatic level, dictating the day-to-day operation which requires to be constantly improved upon. While the preservation, or ‘saving’ of the Constitution is essential at the first level, a rigid insistence on ‘saving’ the constitution on the functional, operational level – where it starts to favour originality over improvement and betterment – might prove dangerous in the long run, risking a situation where all future amendments and reforms start seeming impossible.The most striking shortcoming, however, was the poor editorial treatment of the manuscript. As a leading Hindi publisher, Vani Prakashan could have made a more sincere effort in line-editing and curing the spelling, typographical and grammatical errors in the book. Although it does not hurt the overall contribution that the book sought to make, it definitely pains the eyes of the sincere Hindi reader who expects their book to be neat.Hum Bharat ke Log makes important contributions to Indian constitutional discourse. The book’s timing is also particularly significant given the contemporary debates about constitutional resilience and democratic backsliding occurring globally. By providing citizens with analytical tools for evaluating constitutional performance, the work contributes to democratic discourse and popular participation. Lastly, for the broader academic community, the book demonstrates how constitutional scholarship can maintain rigour while serving public educational purposes. This dual commitment to scholarly standards and civic engagement represents an important model for engaged constitutional scholarship.Aditya Krishna is a lawyer practicing in Delhi, and also active with the All India Central Council of Trade Unions (AICCTU)>