"A society that treats tradition as beyond question fails to reform unjust practices." Examine with reference to social reform in India.

Article 51A(h) makes it a Fundamental Duty to develop "scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform" [2]. Justice Ujjal Bhuyan recently warned that a society which fears questions and treats tradition as beyond question cannot reform unjust practices [1]. India's reform history largely supports this, with some limits.

How unquestioned tradition protected injustice

• Caste and untouchability were defended as a sacred order. They kept millions away from temples, wells and schools.
• Gender practices such as sati, child marriage and the ban on widow remarriage lasted because people saw them as religious duty.
• Superstition still causes violence. Maharashtra had to list practices such as human sacrifice and exploitative black magic as offences [3].

How questioning drove reform

• 19th-century reformers: Raja Ram Mohan Roy's campaign helped abolish sati (1829). Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar's campaign produced the Hindu Widows' Remarriage Act, 1856. Both men tested custom against reason and humanity.
• Anti-caste movements: Jyotiba Phule, Periyar and B.R. Ambedkar rejected the sanctity of caste. Their work led to Article 17, which abolished untouchability.
• Constitutional morality: in Shayara Bano (2017), the Supreme Court struck down instant triple talaq. It refused to protect a practice just because it was old [4].
• Rational law-making: Maharashtra's 2013 Act punishes specific harmful acts. A savings clause protects worship and festivals [3].

Where the statement needs qualifying

• Tradition is not one fixed thing. Bhakti saints, Basavanna and Guru Nanak reformed society from inside tradition. Vidyasagar himself quoted the shastras to argue for widow remarriage.
• Questioning can turn into coercion. If the State decides what counts as "superstition", it may clash with Article 25. Reform should target harm, not private belief.
• Laws alone are not enough. Untouchability and dowry continue despite being banned, so people's attitudes also have to change.

Way forward

• Inquiry should start in classrooms. Justice Bhuyan said universities must let students question without fear of punishment [1].
• Teaching should follow NEP 2020's focus on critical thinking. Laws should target harmful acts, not belief.

Treating tradition as unquestionable protects injustice. Reasoned inquiry, often from inside tradition, has driven India's major reforms. If Article 51A(h) becomes an everyday habit rather than a slogan, it can deliver the Preamble's promise of justice, liberty and dignity for all.