What is Article 390 of Indian Constitution – Defination & Meaning

Article 390: Money received or raised or expenditure incurred between the commencement of the Constitution and the 31st day of March, 1950 Omitted by the
📅 Part XXI – Temporary, Transitional and Special Provisions
🏷️Omitted

📚 UPSC Relevant

Article Number

390

part

Part XXI – Temporary, Transitional and Special Provisions

Status

Omitted

Full Definition & Explanation

Article 390 of the Indian Constitution dealt with money received or spent before the Constitution came into effect on January 26, 1950, until March 31, 1950. This provision was key for accounting and financial clarity during the transition to a new constitutional framework. It allowed the government to recognize and validate financial transactions that occurred during this transitional period, ensuring that all financial dealings were in accordance with the new constitutional guidelines. The article aimed to provide legal sanctity to expenditures and receipts that happened before the Constitution was fully operational. By doing so, it protected the government’s financial policies and practices during a critical time when India was establishing its governance structure. While it primarily affected government accounting, citizens and businesses were also indirectly impacted, as the clarity in financial transactions helped in stabilizing the economy. This clarity was key for establishing trust between the government and its citizens. However, Article 390 was omitted by the Constitution (Seventh Amendment) Act, 1956, which came into effect on November 1, 1956. The amendment removed this article as it was no longer necessary, given that the financial operations and accounts had stabilized under the new constitutional order. The removal of Article 390 reflects the evolving nature of constitutional needs and the adaptability of the legal framework to the changing needs of governance in India, showcasing how constitutional amendments can respond to practical governance issues.

Historical Context

Article 390 was part of the original Constitution adopted on January 26, 1950. During the Constituent Assembly debates, members discussed the complexities of transitioning from British rule to self-governance, including financial accountability. Article 390 was seen as necessary for legitimizing financial transactions during this period. It was amended and ultimately omitted by the Constitution (Seventh Amendment) Act in 1956, reflecting the assembly’s commitment to simplifying governance as the nation matured. The amendment was necessary to streamline financial regulations as the economy stabilized post-independence, and it indicated a shift towards a more robust legal framework for financial accountability.

Key Features

– Article 390 recognized financial transactions before the Constitution’s commencement.
– It applied to money received or spent until March 31, 1950.
– The article provided legal backing for transitional financial activities.
– It was omitted by the Seventh Amendment in 1956.
– The omission signified the stabilization of India’s financial governance.

Importance & Impact

– Validating historical financial transactions ensured legal consistency in governance and accounting.
– It ensured accountability for all government expenditures that took place before 1950.
– The removal of Article 390 indicated the growth of India’s constitutional financial system over time.
– The omission made it easier to create new financial regulations under the Constitution.
– This change simplified legal complexities for future financial governance in India.

Sample UPSC Question

Consider the following statements regarding Article 390 of the Indian Constitution: 1) It was key for validating financial transactions before the Constitution came into effect. 2) The article was removed by the Eighth Amendment. 3) Its omission reflects the stabilization of financial governance. Which of the statements is/are correct? A) 1 only B) 1 and 2 only C) 2 and 3 only D) 1 and 3 only.

Answer

The correct answer is D. Statement 1 is accurate, as Article 390 did validate financial transactions prior to the Constitution’s implementation. Statement 2 is incorrect since it was the Seventh Amendment that removed the article, not the Eighth. Statement 3 correctly describes the significance of the omission.

Key Takeaways

✓ Article 390 validated financial transactions before the Constitution took effect.
✓ It was omitted when the financial system stabilized in 1956.
✓ The article aimed to ensure legal clarity in transitional finances.
✓ Removal simplified legal complexities for future financial regulations.
✓ Article 390’s removal indicated a mature constitutional framework.

FAQs

Article 390 aimed to validate specific financial transactions that occurred between January 26, 1950, and March 31, 1950. It ensured that all receipts and expenditures during this transitional period were legally recognized within the framework of the new Constitution. By doing this, it maintained accountability and transparency in government finances during a time of major administrative change.

Article 390 was omitted by the Seventh Amendment in 1956, as it became redundant for functioning governance. By that time, the financial system had stabilized under the new framework, and the need for transitional provisions diminished. This change allowed for clearer and more streamlined financial regulations, reflecting the growth of India’s constitutional framework and its focus on efficiency.

The Seventh Amendment signifies the removal of certain provisions, including Article 390, that were deemed unnecessary for the current governance system. It reflects the evolution of the Constitution in response to the changing needs of the nation. This amendment underscores the adaptability of India’s legal framework in ensuring clarity and efficiency in financial governance.

Related Articles

Picture of Pramod Pal Founder and Editor-in-Chief

Pramod Pal Founder and Editor-in-Chief

Pramod is the Founder and Editor-in-Chief of StudyHub. He holds a Master's degree and is currently pursuing a Ph.D. in Geology, alongside more than 7+ years spent building and verifying competitive exam content for Indian aspirants. He leads StudyHub's editorial process across Indian Polity, the Constitution, Indian Economy, History, Geography, Science, and the platform's other subject areas — checking every article against primary sources (bare act text and Gazette notifications for constitutional topics, government and Economic Survey data for economy content, standard reference material elsewhere) and flagging it for re-verification whenever a relevant amendment, policy, or data update makes an earlier version outdated.
Scroll to Top