A major hearing on the National Song took place in the Supreme Court today, and the courtroom saw some sharp exchanges .The case challenges the recent amendment which makes singing of Vande Mataram compulsory in certain public functions and institutions. What The Petitioner Argued Appearing for the petitioner, Senior Advocate Dr. S Muralidhar argued that there is a serious flaw in the law. He pointed out that the amendment does not clearly define what the “National Song” is — which version, how many stanzas, and in what form? This ambiguity, he said, can lead to misuse and harassment on the ground. He also submitted that the MHA Office Memorandum which is being relied upon to enforce the song has not even been officially gazetted. Court’s Observation and Centre’s Reply At this point, Justice Bagchi made an interesting observation. He noted that the American National Anthem uses the words “In God We Trust”, even though the USA is considered a classic model of positive secularism.The argument — can a secular state have references to faith in its national symbols? This was followed by a strong interjection from the Centre. Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, expressing displeasure over the petition, said — “Secularism cannot be this narrow.” Supreme Court’s Key Remark The most important remark from the Bench came as a reassurance. The Supreme Court told the Centre that it expects no criminal consequences or penal action against any person who does not sing Vande Mataram for genuine religious reasons. The Bench essentially indicated that while the state may promote the National Song, it cannot become a tool for criminal prosecution against someone’s faith. The matter will be heard further. For now, the top court’s statement brings relief to many who feared the order could be misused. Post navigation 8th Pay Commission: Why Structural Bureaucratic Overhaul Matters More Than Pay Hikes
