The economy must also thank the Constitution

It gave India the space to adjust its economic policy in favour of market forces. The irony at this stage is that even capitalist success might require the aid of socialist redistributive tools

Among key reasons for the Indian Constitution's durability, we can count the fact that its framers did not try to box future policies into the framework of any social or economic ideology. As Ambedkar had argued, that would amount to "taking away the liberty of people to decide the social organization in which they wish to live." This principle was cited by India's Supreme Court in its recent 7:2 ruling that said not all private property can be deemed a "material resource of the community" for redistribution under Article 39(b) of the Constitution.

Contrary interpretations, as it noted, had the imprint of an ideology that was over-invested in public ownership at the cost of private. Speaking in the context of how our 'mixed economy' first underwent "socialist reforms" and then "market-based reforms," the apex court observed: "India's economic trajectory indicates that the Constitution and [its] custodians-the electorate-have routinely rejected one economic dogma as being the exclusive repository of truth."