Article 1

When the Constitution was drafted, India had just emerged from British colonial rule and included former British provinces, princely states, and other territories with very different histories. The framers needed a single opening clause to declare the country's identity and its 'Union' character, and to leave room for the map of India to change over time (new states being formed, territories reorganized, or new lands acquired) without needing to redefine the country itself.

The Supreme Court has held that the phrase 'Union of States' means India is not a result of an agreement among States (unlike, say, the USA), and no State has the right to secede — sovereignty flows from the Constitution downward, not from the States upward. In the Berubari Union case (1960), the Court examined whether ceding Indian territory to another country required a constitutional amendment, clarifying how Article 1(3)(c) and related provisions interact with India's territorial integrity. Courts have also treated the First Schedule as capable of being changed through the States Reorganisation Act and similar laws made under Article 3, without disturbing Article 1 itself.

• Myth: Because India is a 'Union of States,' individual states have the right to secede if they want to.
  Fact: Courts have interpreted 'Union of States' to mean the opposite: India is indestructible, and no state has a constitutional right to break away.
• Myth: 'Bharat' and 'India' are two different legal entities or names with different status.
  Fact: Article 1 treats 'India' and 'Bharat' as the same name for one country, used interchangeably in the Constitution's text.
• Myth: The territory of India is permanently fixed by Article 1 and can never change.
  Fact: Article 1(3)(c) itself allows for new territories to be acquired, and Parliament can alter state boundaries or the First Schedule through laws made under Article 3, subject to constitutional procedure.