Question: What view Supreme Court has taken in its recent decision on the ‘National Anthem’? [RJS 1986] Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites. [What view Supreme Court has taken in its recent decision on ‘National Anthem’?] Answer: Section 3 of the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971, provides for three-year imprisonment… Read More »

Question: What view Supreme Court has taken in its recent decision on the ‘National Anthem’? [RJS 1986] Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites. [What view Supreme Court has taken in its recent decision on ‘National Anthem’?] Answer: Section 3 of the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971, provides for three-year imprisonment or fine for “whoever intentionally prevents the singing of the Indian national anthem or causes disturbances to any...

Question: What view Supreme Court has taken in its recent decision on the ‘National Anthem’? [RJS 1986]

Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites. [What view Supreme Court has taken in its recent decision on ‘National Anthem’?]

Answer:

Section 3 of the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971, provides for three-year imprisonment or fine for “whoever intentionally prevents the singing of the Indian national anthem or causes disturbances to any assembly engaged in such singing”.

Also, Article 51-A (a) of the Constitution makes it every citizen’s duty to “abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals and institutions, the national flag and the national anthem”.

But neither of these provisions expressly spells out the proper way to show such respect, nor do they talk about sitting or standing while the national anthem plays.

In Emmanuel v. State of Kerala, [1987 AIR 748] Three children namely Bijoe, Binu, and Bindu, studying in a school in Ettumanoor near Kottayam, were expelled from school after they refused to sing the national anthem of India. Their father had asked them not to salute the flag or sing the anthem because it was against their religious faith in Jehovah’s Witnesses. Through their representative, they filed a writ petition in the High Court of Kerala State, seeking to restrain authorities from preventing their school attendance.

They alleged that their expulsion amounted to an infringement of their fundamental rights to freedom of expression under Article 19 and freedom of religion under Article 25 of the Constitution of India. The High Court dismissed the petition on the ground that no word or thought in the national anthem could offend any religious beliefs.

The Supreme Court of India found that the expulsion of school children for not singing the national anthem constituted a violation of their right to freedom of expression under Article 19 and freedom of religion under Article 25 of the Constitution of India. The Court reasoned that a limitation on the right to freedom of expression must be based on law with statutory force and hence the court ordered the government to re-admit the expelled children.


Important Mains Questions Series for Judiciary, APO & University Exams

  1. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-I
  2. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-I
  3. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-II
  4. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-IV
  5. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-V
  6. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-VI
  7. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-VII
  8. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-VIII
  9. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-IX
  10. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-X
Updated On 2021-06-25T05:07:59+05:30
Admin LB

Admin LB

Next Story