Supreme Court Tells Centre: No Penalty for Conscientious Objectors on Vande Mataram

The Supreme Court on Tuesday told the Centre that a conscientious objector should not face punishment for declining to sing Vande Mataram, and said the principle laid down in its 1986 ruling in Bijoe Emmanuel versus State of Kerala should govern the amended law on national honour.

A bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, and also comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, was hearing a petition filed by Carnatic vocalist T M Krishna challenging the requirement to sing all six stanzas of Vande Mataram. Krishna has argued that the last four verses conflict with the secular character of the nation.

The court sought the Centre's response on the plea. Justice Bagchi observed orally that while the declaration of law in Bijoe Emmanuel has not been questioned, it is for the democratic state to decide what constitutes the national song and whether it comprises two stanzas or more. However, he added, nobody who alleges an infringement of their rights under Articles 25 and 26, or who is a conscientious objector, should be subjected to penal consequences.

The bench indicated that it is not the court's role to second-guess national sentiments or aspirations associated with Vande Mataram, nor to determine what the national song should be. It said it would examine whether the rights of a conscientious objector, particularly one who declines to sing on religious grounds, are protected under the law.

Krishna's petition challenges Section 3 of the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971, as amended in 2026, along with Ministry of Home Affairs orders dated January 28 and July 9, 2026. The amended provision carries imprisonment of up to three years, or a fine, or both, for anyone who intentionally prevents the singing of the National Anthem or national song, or causes disturbance to an assembly engaged in such singing.

Senior advocate S Muralidhar, appearing for Krishna, contended that the amendment does not define the expression "national song", leaving room for uncertainty and possible misuse. He said the amendment had been enacted without specifying which version or stanzas constituted the national song, and that the MHA directions were issued through an office memorandum that had not been gazetted. He argued that the government had altered the earlier understanding of Vande Mataram through executive instructions, and that the established understanding related to its first two stanzas. He also submitted that the amendment had been enacted hastily and without a process of national consensus.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta urged the bench not to issue notice on the petition, saying that doing so could sensationalise the issue. He opposed the petitioner's submissions, stating that secularism cannot be viewed so narrowly.

During the hearing, an unpleasant exchange broke out between Muralidhar and the Solicitor General. Mehta made a remark referring to what he described as those who do not respect the law-making process. Muralidhar strongly objected and sought withdrawal of the remark, saying such a comment did not befit a law officer. After the hearing, Muralidhar again sought a retraction, but the Solicitor General declined to withdraw the remark, saying he was not sorry for what he said and that one has to go by law. Muralidhar later accused the Solicitor General of playing to the gallery.

The bench did not intervene in the exchange, but said it was not taking note of the comments.

According to Krishna's petition, extending penal provisions to the national song, combined with directions for the rendition of all six stanzas, raises fundamental questions concerning freedom of speech and expression, freedom of conscience, equality, religious freedom and secularism. The petition specifically challenges the requirement that the complete six-stanza version be treated as the official version of the national song, and the direction that where Vande Mataram and the national anthem are both sung or played, the former should precede the latter.