Why in the News

The Supreme Court stated that the Union Home Ministry advisory on Vande Mataram is not mandatory and does not violate constitutional freedoms.

Background

• Union Home Ministry issued January 28 advisory
• Suggested:
  • Playing Vande Mataram in full
  • At public and ceremonial events
• Petition filed challenging advisory

Supreme Court Observations

Advisory Not Mandatory

• Court clarified:
  • Advisory is not binding
  • No penalty for non compliance
  • No legal consequences

Court stated

• Advisory only prescribes protocol
• No threat to constitutional freedoms
• Petition based on vague apprehensions

Petitioner’s Arguments

Petitioner argued

• Advisory makes singing socially mandatory
• Creates pressure to conform
• May burden those refusing to sing
• Playing Vande Mataram before National Anthem reduces anthem’s importance

Court’s Response

• No legal burden exists
• No notice or punishment mentioned
• Advisory uses non mandatory language

Example

• Schools may begin day with Vande Mataram
• “May” means optional

Government’s Position

Solicitor General argued

• Respect for national symbols should be organic
• Cited Article 51A Fundamental Duties
• Citizens must respect:
  • National Flag
  • National Anthem

National Anthem vs National Song

Historical Context

• January 24, 1950 decision
• Jana Gana Mana adopted as National Anthem
• Vande Mataram adopted as National Song

Important

• Article 51A mentions National Anthem
• Does not explicitly mention National Song

Supreme Court Decision

• Petition termed premature
• Court refused to intervene
• Petitioners may approach court if: Discrimination occurs and Coercion happens