Integrity And Respect Towards The National Anthem: Shyam Chouskey Narayan Vs Union Of India

DATE OF JUDGMENT:
09/012018

BENCH:
CHIEF JUSTICE DIPAK MISHRA, JUSTICE DY CHANDRACHUD, JUSTICE AM KHANVILKAR

PARTIES:
PETITIONER: SHYAM NARAYAN CHOUSKEY
RESPONDENT: UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

SUBJECT

The case is significant in Indian history since it instills a load of feeling of respect for the National Anthem. Including the country's flag and the Indian constitution, the National Anthem is a source of National pride.

LEGAL PROVISION

Article 32, Union of India v. Naveen Jindal

OVERVIEW

1. Everything began with a writ petition filed by the plaintiff under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution, seeking the issuance of a permanent injunction or any other suitable writ or command directing the defendant to act accordingly in issues involving what might be considered insult and violence of the National Anthem.
2. On the 28th of October 2016, the Supreme Court, while hearing the writ, referred to the Prevention of Insults to National Honor Act, 1971. It was asserted that the National Anthem is occasionally recited in numerous unacceptable settings that are not permitted in light of National honor.
3. The plaintiff said that the National Anthem should be appreciated and honored by all citizens of this country. Under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution, the plaintiff asked the judge to grant a writ of mandamus to define and comprehend what constitutes abuse and contempt of the National Anthem.
4. Two applications were submitted stating concerns regarding how physically challenged persons can pay respect for the National Anthem in movie theaters?
5. The plea sought an exception to this rule. The learned Attorney General of India responded by submitting recommendations for physically disabled or impaired people, which the Central Govt was to approve.
6. The court stated that the Union of India's constituted panel must provide its suggestions. The Court stated that the decree, which was enacted on November 30, 2016, would be changed, and the rendition of the National Anthem at movie theaters shall no longer be compulsory, but rather voluntary.

ISSUES

1. What comprises honor and disdain for the National Anthem, as well as what should be undertaken when it is being performed or sung?
2. Whether the arguments given by India's erudite Attorney General, Mr Mukul Rohtagi, were likewise applicable for challenged Indians? Whether as per the documents submitted by the erudite Attorney General of India, people who are disabled experience challenges ?

JUDGMENT ANALYSIS

1. CJI Dipak Mishra rendered the judgment in this issue on January 9, 2018. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, citing Union of India v. Naveen Jindal, stated that the National Anthem and Flag cannot be insulted and therefore every individual is required to show reverence but nevertheless also stated that the film theaters are also not the appropriate venue because people are coming here for uninterrupted pleasure.
2. The court went on to say that emblems of the country require a great deal of respect since they act as the nation's crucial symbols and generate a feeling of togetherness and authenticity among the population.
3. The court in their verdict mentioned that the National Anthem must not be commercialized for the purpose of gaining financial gain or any other benefit.
4. Wherein, the National Anthem cannot be used in a way that provides economic or other benefits to anyone participating in it, whether explicitly or implicitly. The National Anthem must not be dramatized, and that should not be performed as part of any entertainment act.
5. That's because everyone gathered must show honor and respect while the National Anthem is performed or produced, and it is certainly impossible to assume that the public would feel integrated and honored towards the National Anthem ahead of a movie, which the public would be looking forward to as their leisure.
6. The court then stated that the National Anthem, wholly or partially, should not be reproduced on any material and must never again be presented in such a way as to be insulting to its standing and akin to contempt.
7. That's because the idea of the etiquette linked with the National Anthem has had its roots in nationhood, National integrity, and democratic Nationalism. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India completed its verdict by declaring that performing National Anthems is not required and therefore is up to the choice of the individuals involved.
8. Individuals are obligated to show respect whenever the National Anthem is played or sung, as obliged by administrative directives, therefore rejecting the plea.

CONCLUSION

It takes us only a couple of seconds to perform or stand for the National Anthem. So, spending a couple of seconds from our life on something so fragile and which can uplift our integrity and can unite everyone and lead us on a voyage of independence, reminding us of our freedom fighters’' struggles, we should appreciate it and follow the rule made by the Supreme Court in Shyam Narayan Chouksey v. Union of India.

Click here to download the original copy of the judgement