National Anthem: India
(→Disabled exempted: SC) |
(→The Kabhi Khushi Kabhie Gham case) |
||
| Line 612: | Line 612: | ||
As the SC had set aside the HC order, people aggrieved by the Nov 2016 order may ask the court to refer the issue of commercial exploitation of the national anthem to a larger bench. | As the SC had set aside the HC order, people aggrieved by the Nov 2016 order may ask the court to refer the issue of commercial exploitation of the national anthem to a larger bench. | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Needn't stand if anthem is in film== | ||
| + | [http://epaperbeta.timesofindia.com/Article.aspx?eid=31808&articlexml=SC-Neednt-stand-for-anthem-if-its-in-15022017001049 AmitAnand Choudhary, SC: Needn't stand for anthem if it's in film, Feb 15, 2017: The Times of India] | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | There is no need to compulsorily stand up when the national anthem is sung or played as part of a film or documentary , the Supreme Court said on Tuesday while clarifying its earlier order in the wake of reports that people were assaulted for not rising when the anthem was played during a film. | ||
| + | |||
| + | In its earlier order, the apex court had invoked what it called “constitutional patriotism“ to say that people need to stand up when the national anthem was played before the screening of a film. | ||
| + | |||
| + | However, it was not clear whether the requirement to show deference to the national anthem applied even when it was played as part of the script. The court's clarification followed reports of people being beaten and bullied in cinema halls for not standing up for the national anthem when it was played in the middle of Aamir Khan-starrer `Dangal'. It is clarified that when the national anthem is sung or played in the storyline of a feature film or as part of the newsreel or docu or as part of the newsreel or documentary , apart from what has been stated in the order dated November 30, 2016, the audience need not stand,“ a bench of Justices Dipak Misra and R Banumathi said. | ||
| + | |||
| + | It, however, said the apex court's interim order, making it mandatory for cinema halls to play the national anthem before screening of films, would continue. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Importantly , as part of the arguments on Tuesday , attorney general Mukul Rohatgi said singing the anthem should be made mandatory in schools as part of instilling patriotism in the population. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The court had said in its November order that the national anthem must be played in all cinema halls before a film was screened and everyone present must stand up. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The SC order was criticised by some sections and several petitions filed seeking recall of the verdict.Challenging the SC's direction, senior advocate Rajeev Dhawan said the court shouldn't have passed the order as making the national anthem mandatory at places of entertainment was “popcorn nationalism“ and amounted to “moral policing“. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The Centre, however, stoutly defended the court's order and said there was no compulsion to sing the national anthem but people must stand up. Rohatgi also said singing of national anthem should be made mandatory in schools. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Senior advocate C U Singh, appearing for Kodungallur Film Society, said forcing the national anthem on people in cinema halls would not promote nationalism. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The bench, after hearing all sides, said it didn't mean to do moral policing and the issue needed to be debated in a larger perspective.“Our order may be correct or may be incorrect. This has to be debated and decided after hearing all sides,“ it said while posting the case for final disposal on April 18. | ||
=Commentaries and views= | =Commentaries and views= | ||
Revision as of 23:34, 22 March 2017
This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content. |
The history of its composition
The song Jana-gana-mana, composed originally in Bengali by Rabindranath Tagore, was adopted in its Hindi version by the Constituent Assembly as the National Anthem of India on 24 January 1950. It was first sung on 27 December 1911 at the Kolkata Session of the Indian National Congress. The complete song consists of five stanzas. The first stanza contains the full version of the National Anthem
David Courtney adds: The Indian national anthem has been composed in Raag - Alhiya Bilawal and set to the Keharava Taal.
Nine facts about our National Anthem
9 interesting facts about our National Anthem, India Today July 8, 2015
It is a reflex in every Indian to rise the moment you hear the pride inducing words from our national anthem, leaving all what one is busy with. Soulful composition and the evocative lyrics surely move you into the realm of patriotism, at least momentarily.
All of us have sung the national anthem and since school, stood up every time we heard it . But do we know enough about our anthem other than that it was written and composed by Nobel laureate and mystic poet Ravindranath Tagore? Here are some interesting facts about our anthem which you probably were not aware of:
1. The false myth that Jana Gana Mana was written and composed by Tagore to praise George the Fourth, who visited India in 1911.
In a letter dated 19th March 1939, Tagore wrote - "I should only insult myself if I cared to answer those who consider me capable of such unbounded stupidity as to sing in praise of George the Fourth or George the Fifth as the Eternal Charioteer leading the pilgrims on their journey through countless ages of the timeless history of mankind. That pretty much explains it."
2. A hoax message spread like wild fire across e-mail, Whatsapp and social media, that UNESCO announced our anthem as the 'Best National Anthem' in the world. UNESCO intervened and denied any such declaration from their end.
3. The first rendition of the song was during a convention of the Indian National Congress on December 16th, 1911. 'Jana Gana Mana' was performed for the first time in Hamburg on 11th September, 1942. It was only on 24th January 1950 that this song was officially declared as India's national anthem.
4. The musical notations for the English translation of our national anthem were set by Margaret, wife of poet James H. Cousins, who was the principal of Besant Theosophical College.
5. Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose commissioned a free translation of the national anthem from Sanskritized Bengali to Urdu-Hindi. The translation was written by Captain Abid Ali, composed by Captain Ram Singh Thakur and was called Subah Sukh Chain.
6. There is no provision of law which compels anyone to sing the national anthem. It is not considered disrespectful to the nation or to the anthem if a person chooses only to stand up in respectful silence.
7. Formal rendition of the anthem should take 52 seconds by law, and not 54 seconds.
8. Interestingly, Rabindranath Tagore has written the national anthem of Bangladesh as well.
9. In 2005, many protested and called for deleting the word Sindh and to replace it with the word Kashmir. Argument was that Sindh is now a part of Kashmir. [Indpaedia humbly suggests that the word Sind should be replaced by ‘poorb,’ the East, to include the Seven Sisters of the North East. Six Himalayan states, including Jammu and Kashmir, are included in the word ‘Himachal.’]
On 7th of July, 2015, Rajasthan Governor, Kalyan Singh called for replacing the word Adhinayaka with the word Mangal, basing his argument on the myth Tagore himself busted back in 1939 itself.
The full text, in Bengali, Devnagari and Roman scripts
In Devanagari (Hindi)
जन गण मन अधिनायक जय हे
भारत भाग्यविधाता
पंजाब सिन्धु गुजरात मराठा
द्राविड़ उत्कल बंगा
विन्ध्य हिमाचल यमुना गंगा
उच्छल जलधि तरंगा
तव शुभ नामे जागे
तव शुभ आशीष मागे
गाहे तव जयगाथा
जन गण मंगलदायक जय हे
भारत भाग्यविधाता
जय हे, जय हे, जय हे
जय जय जय जय हे!
A Romanisation of the Anthem in Hindi
Jana-gana-mana-adhinayaka, jaya he
Bharata-bhagya-vidhata.
Punjab-Sindh-Gujarat-Maratha
Dravida-Utkala-Banga
Vindhya-Himachala-Yamuna-Ganga
Uchchala-Jaladhi-taranga.
Tava shubha name jage,
Tava shubha asisa mange,
Gahe tava jaya gatha,
Jana-gana-mangala-dayaka jaya he
Bharata-bhagya-vidhata.
Jaya he, jaya he, jaya he,
Jaya jaya jaya, jaya he!
The complete Bengali original
1. জনগণমন-অধিনায়ক জয় হে ভারতভাগ্যবিধাতা!
পঞ্জাব সিন্ধু গুজরাট মরাঠা দ্রাবিড় উত্কল বঙ্গ
বিন্ধ্য হিমাচল যমুনা গঙ্গা উচ্ছলজলধিতরঙ্গ
তব শুভ নামে জাগে, তব শুভ আশিস মাগে,
গাহে তব জয়গাথা।
জনগণমঙ্গলদায়ক জয় হে ভারতভাগ্যবিধাতা!
জয় হে, জয় হে, জয় হে, জয় জয় জয়, জয় হে॥
2. অহরহ তব আহ্বান প্রচারিত, শুনি তব উদার বাণী
হিন্দু বৌদ্ধ শিখ জৈন পারসিক মুসলমান খৃস্টানী
পূরব পশ্চিম আসে তব সিংহাসন-পাশে
প্রেমহার হয় গাঁথা।
জনগণ-ঐক্য-বিধায়ক জয় হে ভারতভাগ্যবিধাতা!
জয় হে, জয় হে, জয় হে, জয় জয় জয়, জয় হে॥
3. পতন-অভ্যুদয়-বন্ধুর পন্থা, যুগ-যুগ ধাবিত যাত্রী।
হে চিরসারথি, তব রথচক্রে মুখরিত পথ দিনরাত্রি।
দারুণ বিপ্লব-মাঝে তব শঙ্খধ্বনি বাজে
সঙ্কটদুঃখত্রাতা।
জনগণপথপরিচায়ক জয় হে ভারতভাগ্যবিধাতা!
জয় হে, জয় হে, জয় হে, জয় জয় জয় জয় হে॥
4. ঘোরতিমিরঘন নিবিড় নিশীথে পীড়িত মূর্ছিত দেশে
জাগ্রত ছিল তব অবিচল মঙ্গল নতনয়নে অনিমেষে।
দুঃস্বপ্নে আতঙ্কে রক্ষা করিলে অঙ্কে
স্নেহময়ী তুমি মাতা।
জনগণদুঃখত্রায়ক জয় হে ভারতভাগ্যবিধাতা!
জয় হে, জয় হে, জয় হে, জয় জয় জয় জয় হে॥
5. রাত্রি প্রভাতিল, উদিল রবিচ্ছবি পূর্ব-উদয়গিরিভালে---
গাহে বিহঙ্গম, পুণ্য সমীরণ নবজীবনরস ঢালে।
তব করুণারুণরাগে নিদ্রিত ভারত জাগে
তব চরণে নত মাথা।
জয় জয় জয় হে, জয় রাজেশ্বর ভারতভাগ্যবিধাতা!
জয় হে, জয় হে, জয় হে, জয় জয় জয় জয় হে॥
A Romanisation of the complete Bengali original
1. Jano Gano Mano Adhinayaka
Jaya Hey Bharata Bhagya Bidhata,
Panjabo Sindhu Gujarato Maratha
Drabiro Utkala Bango
Bindhyo Himachalo Jamuna Ganga
Uchhalo Jalodhi Tarango
Tabo Subho Namay Jagay
Tabo Subho Ashiso Magay
Gahay Tabo Jayagatha.
Jano Gano Mangala Daayaka
Jaya Hey Bharata Bhagya Bidhata
Jaya Hey, Jaya Hey, Jaya Hey,
Jaya Jaya Jaya Jaya Hey
2. Aharaha Tabo Awhbano Pracharito
Shuni Tabo Udaro Bani
Hindu Bauddho Sikho Jaino
Parasiko Musalmano Khristani
Puraba Pashchimo Aashay
Tabo Singhasano Pashay
Premoharo Hawye Gantha
Jano Gano Oikya Bidhyaka
Jaya Hey Bharata Bhagya Bidhata
Jaya Hey, Jaya Hey, Jaya Hey,
Jaya Jaya Jaya, Jaya Hey
3. Patana Abhyudaya Bandhuro Pantha
Jugo Jugo Dhabito Jatri
He Chiro Sarathi, Tabo Ratha Chakre
Mukharito Patha Dino Ratri
Daruna Biplaba Majhay
Tabo Shankha Dhwani Bajay
Sankata Dukho Trata
Jano Gano Patha Parichyaka
Jaya Hey Bharata Bhagya Bidhata
Jaya Hey, Jaya Hey, Jaya Hey,
Jaya Jaya Jaya, Jaya Hey
4. Ghoro Timiro Ghono Nibiro
Nishithay Pirito Murchhito Deshay
Jagrata Chhilo Tabo Abichalo Mangalo
Nato Nayanay Animeshay
Duhswapnay Atankay
Rakkha Karilay Ankay
Snehamayee Tumi Mata
Jano Gano Dukho Trayaka
Jaya Hey Bharata Bhagya Bidhata
Jaya Hey, Jaya Hey, Jaya Hey,
Jaya Jaya Jaya, Jaya Hey
5. Ratri Prabhatilo Udilo Rabichhabi
Purbo Udaya Giri Bhalay
Gahay Bihangamo Punyo Samirano
Nabo Jibana Rasa Dhalay
Tabo Karunaruno Ragay
Nidrito Bharata Jagay
Jaya Jaya Jaya Hey, Jaya Rajeswara
Bharata Bhagya Bidhata
Jaya Hey, Jaya Hey, Jaya Hey,
Jaya Jaya Jaya, Jaya Hey
Playing time of the full version of the national anthem is approximately
52 seconds. A short version consisting of the first and last lines of the stanza (playing
time approximately 20 seconds) is also played on certain occasions.
Tagore’s English rendering of the anthem
The following is Tagore’s English rendering of the anthem :
Thou art the ruler of the minds of all people,
Dispenser of India’s destiny.
Thy name rouses the hearts of Punjab, Sind, Gujarat and Maratha,
Of the Dravida and Orissa and Bengal;
It echoes in the hills of the Vindhyas and Himalayas, mingles in the music of Jamuna and Ganges and is chanted by the waves of the Indian Sea.
They pray for thy blessings and sing thy praise.
The saving of all people waits in thy hand,
Thou dispenser of India’s destiny.
Victory, victory, victory to thee.
Gurudev’s English rendering of the entire Bengali original
From The Morning Song of India, Wikisource
Oh! the ruler of the minds of people, Victory be to You,
Dispenser of the destiny of India!
Punjab, Sind, Gujarat, Maharashtra,
Dravid (South India), Orissa, and Bengal,
The Vindhya, the Himalayas, the Yamuna, the Ganges,
And the oceans with foaming waves all around.
Wake up listening to Your auspicious name,
Ask for Your auspicious blessings,
And sing to Your glorious victory.
Oh! You who impart well being to the people,
Victory be to You, dispenser of the destiny of India!
Victory, victory, victory to You!
Your call is announced continuously,
We heed Your gracious call
The Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Jains, Parsees,
Muslims, and Christians,
The East and the West come together,
To the side of Your throne
And weave the garland of love.
Oh! You who bring in the unity of the people!
Victory be to You, dispenser of the destiny of India!
Victory, victory, victory to You!
The way of life is somber as it moves through ups and downs,
But we, the pilgrims, have followed it through ages.
Oh! Eternal Charioteer, the wheels of your chariot
Echo day and night in the path
In the midst of fierce revolution,
Your conch shell sounds.
You save us from fear and misery.
Oh! You who guide the people through torturous path,
Victory be to You, dispenser of the destiny of India!
Victory, victory, victory to You!
BESANT THEOSOPHICAL COLLEGE
BESANT THEOSOPHICAL COLLEGE
During the bleakest of nights,
When the whole country was sick and in swoon
Wakeful remained Your incessant blessings,
Through Your lowered but winkless eyes
Through nightmares and fears,
You protected us on Your lap,
Oh Loving Mother!
Oh! You who have removed the misery of the people,
Victory be to You, dispenser of the destiny of India!
Victory, victory, victory to You!
The night is over, and the Sun has risen
over the hills of the eastern horizon.
The birds are singing, and a gentle auspicious breeze
Is pouring the elixir of new life.
By the halo of Your compassion,
India that was asleep is now waking
On your feet we now lay our heads
Oh! Victory, victory, victory to you, the Supreme King,
Victory be to You, dispenser of the destiny of India!
Victory, victory, victory to You!
Due respect
The Jehovah’s Witnesses case, 1986
See National Anthem, India: Jehovah’s Witnesses
Is not standing up an offence?
The Times of India, Dec 01 2015
Ayesha Venkataraman
Does one violate any law if they do not stand up for the national anthem? “I don't think it's so much a matter of legality as propriety. It's not an offence, there is no Act which says you must stand,“ said senior advocate Iqbal Chagla.The only law that weighs in on the appropriate behaviour during the national anthem is Section 3 of The Prevention of In sults to National Honour Act, 1971, which states, “Whoever intentionally prevents the singing of the Indian National Anthem or causes disturbances to any assembly engaged in such singing shall be punished with imprisonment for a term, which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.“ It makes no mention of a mandate to stand while it's played.
However, guidelines issued by the ministry of home affairs categorically state, “Whenever the anthem is sung or played, the audience shall stand to attention.“ But this is not legally enforceable. “Guidelines from the home ministry are not legislation.They serve an advisory role,“ said Chagla.
“It's a difficult issue, really. The broad view is that you respect the anthem. And re spect is shown by standing up... You do it, unless you're incapable of doing that,“ said Darius Khambata, senior counsel and former ad vocate general of Maharashtra. But he didn't condone the “thug nationalism that's going on“. “Beating someone up shows more disrespect. People will do anything, they will run their lives any way they want, and then, suddenly , on this issue, they will get hyper-nationalistic,“ he added.
A PVR spokesperson added, “According to a Maharashtra government order, it is mandatory for all cinemas to play the national anthem before every film. Our staff intervened keeping in mind the safety of guests. A full investigation is under way.“
The playing of the national anthem and the law
Disrespecting the national flag and anthem
See The National Symbols of India
Court and legislative rulings
The Hindu, December 1, 2016
Playing of the national anthem and laws
Sruthi Radhakrishnan
The official duration of the anthem is 52 seconds, though what is usually played in cinema halls exceeds that length.
The Supreme Court in December 2016 ruled that the national anthem should be played before the screening of films in cinema halls, and that all should “stand up in respect.” “...people should feel that they live in a nation and show respect to the national anthem and the national flag,” Justice Dipak Misra said in the ruling.
There have been legal interventions on playing the national anthem in theatres in the past. In 2003, the Maharashtra Assembly passed an order mandating the playing of the national anthem before the start of a movie.
In the 1960s, the national anthem would be played at the end of the film. But as people simply filed out after the movie, this practice was stopped.
The most famous case of punishing someone for not singing the national anthem was that of three children from Kerala. The school students, in Bijoe Emmanuel vs State of Kerala, were expelled for not singing the national anthem, although they remained standing. At the time, the Supreme Court had observed, “There is no provision of law which obliges anyone to sing the National Anthem nor is it disrespectful to the National Anthem if a person who stands up respectfully when the National Anthem is sung does not join the singing.”
Existing laws don’t penalise or force any person to stand up or sing the national anthem. The Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971 states: “Whoever intentionally prevents the singing of the Jana Gana Mana or causes disturbances to any assembly engaged in such singing shall be punished with imprisonment for a term, which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.”
The official duration of the anthem is 52 seconds, though what is usually played in cinema halls exceeds that length.
A Home Ministry order in 2015 stated, “Whenever the Anthem is sung or played, the audience shall stand to attention. However, when in the course of a newsreel or documentary the Anthem is played as a part of the film, it is not expected of the audience to stand as standing is bound to interrupt the exhibition of the film and would create disorder and confusion rather than add to the dignity of the Anthem.”
And the law until now, specifically says that it has been left “to the good sense of the people” not to indulge in indiscriminate singing or playing of the national anthem. There are even specific rules as to whom the national anthem should be played for (the President and not the Prime Minister), and when people can indulge in mass singing of the anthem.
While the application of the Supreme Court order and the penalties for its violation are not clear, there are definitely precedents for “individually perceived notions of freedom”, which this court order says are overindulged, being upheld over nationalistic causes.
Cinema halls to play anthem before films
The Times of India
The Times of India
`Can't Be Used For Commercial Or Any Other Benefit'
Prescribing patriotism for citizens, the Supreme Court made it compulsory for cine ma theatres to play the national anthem with the image of the national flag prior to screening films and said the audience should stand up to show respect.
Seeking implementation of the order in 10 days, a bench of Justices Dipak Misra and Amitava Roy said: “All cinema halls in India shall play the national anthem before the feature film starts and all present in the hall are obliged to stand up to show respect to the national anthem. When national anthem shall be played in cinema halls, it shall be with the national flag on the screen.“ Adopting an activist stance, the Supreme Court said on Wednesday , “A time has come, the citizens of the country must realise that they live in a nation and are duty bound to show respect to national anthem which is the symbol of constitutional patriotism and inherent national quality . It does not allow any different notion or the perception of individual rights, that have (are)individually thought of, have no space.The idea is constitutionally impermissible.“
To make it obligatory for citizens to show respect for the national anthem and flag, the bench issued a series of interim orders after taking concurrence of attorney general Mukul Rohatgi. Indicating that there will be more to come in future from the apex court, the bench said: “When national anthem is sung, the concept of protocol associated with it has its inherent roots in national identity , national integrity and constitutional patriotism.“
The court explained these directions were issued to sensitise citizens to display “love and respect for the motherland“ while showing respect to the national anthem as well as national flag. “It would instil the feeling within one, a sense of committed patriotism and nationalism,“ it said. The court based its directions on Article 51, which provides that it is every citizen's fundamental duty to “abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals and institutions, the national flag and the national anthem.“
The court also banned commercial exploitation of the national anthem.This means no tele-serial, advertisement or theme songs for any event could use the anthem partly, as had been popular practice.“There shall be no commercial exploitation to give financial advantage or any kind of benefit,“ the court said.
Hall owners to keep entry and exit doors closed
`Block exits while playing Jana, Gana...,' Dec 01 2016 : The Times of India
The SC has ordered cinema hall owners to keep entry and exit doors closed to prevent people from walking out while the national anthem is played.
But this direction appears to be diametrically opposite to the suggestions made by the SC while delivering its verdict in the 1997 Uphaar cinema hall fire tragedy -59 people had died in the hall following a fire as the exits had been blocked with additional seats.
Association of Victims of Uphaar cinema tragedy [in Delhi, in which several persons were trapped inside the burning hall and died], led by Neelam Krishnamoorthy , expressed surprise at the direction passed in Nov 2016.
Disabled exempted: SC
The Indian Express, December 9, 2016
SC exempts differently-abled from standing during national anthem
The Supreme Court on November 30 had ordered that all the cinema halls in India play the national anthem before the start of the film.
Supreme Court judgement, Supreme Court national anthem order, Supreme Court, national anthem compulsary in theaters, national anthem, national anthem dfferently-abled persons, indian express news Differently-abled persons will now be exempt from standing up during the National Anthem. (File Photo) The Supreme Court on Friday granted exemption to differently-abled persons from standing during the National Anthem. The order was passed by Justice Dipak Misra. This development comes days after the apex court had ordered that “all the cinema halls in India shall play the national anthem before the feature film starts and all present in the hall are obliged to stand up to show respect to the national anthem” as a part of their “sacred obligation”.
Supreme Court Makes Playing National Anthem At Theaters Mandatory
“The directions are issued, for love and respect for the motherland is reflected when one shows respect to the National Anthem as well as to the National Flag. That apart, it would instil the feeling within one, a sense committed patriotism and nationalism,” said the bench comprising Justices Dipak Misra and Amitava Roy, giving 10 days for compliance with its direction.
The court, however, said that physically disabled must show “some such gesture” to express their respect for anthem.It also clarified that doors of theatres need not be bolted when the National Anthem is played.
“As the guidelines are going to be issued, we clarify, if a physically challenged person or physically handicapped person goes to the Cinema hall to watch a film, he need not stand up, if he is incapable to stand, but must show such conduct which is commensurate with respect for the National Anthem…
“Another aspect needs to be cleared. When we said that the doors shall be closed, we did not mean that the doors shall be bolted as mentioned in the case of Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Delhi vs. Uphaar Tragedy Victims Association and Ors….but only to regulate the ingress and egress during the period while the National Anthem is played,” the bench said.
The clarification came after an organiser of an international film festival in Kerala moved the apex court seeking exemption from the November 30 on the ground that it would cause inconvenience to its 1,500 foreign guests. The decision drew mixed reactions with many calling it a move to force patriotism among people while some believed that it would inculcate patriotic feelings for the country. Some activists had even campaigned for the exemption of differently-abled persons. The decision stirred up reactions with many on social media demanding the anthem to be played not just in cinema halls but in Parliament, courts and state Assemblies as well.
SC amplifies its order
Sticking to a tough line on “constitutional patriotism“, the Supreme Court refused to relax its order on playing the national anthem in movie halls even as it set aside the provision for disabled persons.
While agreeing to hear a petition seeking review of the order, a bench of Justice Dipak Misra and Justice Amitava Roy clarified that the rigour of the direction would not apply to the disabled who need not stand up in a theatre during the anthem. The court said the disabled could show respect to the anthem in some other manner and asked the Centre to frame guidelines how such persons should conduct themselves in a cinema hall when the anthem is played before the start of a movie.
The court posted the application for recall of its November 30 order for detailed hearing on February 14. Apart from relaxing the anthem norms for disabled, it clarified that its direction to close the entry and exit gates of cinema halls when the national anthem is played did not amount to bolting the door.The order was hence in line with the Uphaar fire tragedy judgment where the apex court forbade bolting of doors during screening of films.
The application for relaxa tion of the anthem rule was fil ed by organisers of a film fes tival in Kerala, which began on Friday. It is expected to screen an average 60 films a day , with partici pation from 62 countries.
When the organisers plead ed that the SC's order could dis comfit a large number of for eign delegates , the bench said, “In any international event hosted by any country , whenev er anthem of that country is played, the whole audience ris es to its feet. Why should our anthem be an exception?“ Jus tices Misra and Roy said the bench was open to a debate whether its order required re calling. But it wondered how the order affected the right to free speech. “Why should they (delegates) not stand even if the anthem is played 20 times?“
Constitutional experts’ view
Dhananjay Mahapatra, `Overreach': Experts Slam Anthem Order, Dec 01 2016 : The Times of India
`How will the directive be implemented?'
Constitutional experts severely criticised on Wednesday the Supreme Court's order that makes it mandatory for the national anthem to be played before the screening of films in movie halls. They termed ita judicial legislation that would be impossible to implement.
Former attorney general Soli J Sorabjee, a believer in dynamic constitutionalism, said the SC decision was a judicial legislation that went much beyond the constitutional mandate. “To my mind it is incorrect. This ruling appears to overlook law settled in this regard by the Supreme Court in the Bijoe Emmanuel case. The court appears to have entered the realm of judicial legislation and gone much beyond constitutional mandate.“
“How can the court compel a cinema theatre to play the national anthem? Can the cinema hall owners be hauled up for disrespecting the national anthem if some of the patrons did not stand up when it was being screened? There are many questions which are not answered by the court in its interim directions,“ Sorabjee told TOI.
“The court must also consider the impact of this ruling on the fundamental right to practise and profess any religion,“ he added. Constitutional expert Rajeev Dhavan was vitriolic in his criticism. “It seems a very BJP line to take. This is an overreach by the Supreme Court as it seeks to integrate where it should not (by imposing constitutional patriotism). The Supreme Court should not overreach as there will be many people who profess a religion that might prohibit them to bow when the national anthem is sung even though they would be showing utmost respect to the anthem.“
Noted senior advocate and former additional solicitor general K K Venugopal said: “Screening national anthem in the cinema theatres is a good idea. It will lead to imbibing a sense of patriotism and loyalty to the country . But, what if some people inside the theatre don't stand up when the national anthem is played? It will be extremely difficult for the cinema owners to enforce this order.“
Venugopal said: “It would have been better had the Supreme Court passed the order as a recommendation to the Union government to make necessary amendments to the Cinematograph Act and Rules, making it obligatory for the theatre owners to exhibit national anthem before screening a film.“
Private schools: anthem must be sung in--HC
The Times of India, Mar 5, 2016
The Madras High Court has made it clear that the national anthem should be sung in all private schools in Tamil Nadu during the morning assembly.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice MM Sundresh gave the direction on a petition seeking that singing of national anthem be made mandatory in schools.
"Private schools must follow such singing of national anthem as part of their curriculum," the bench said disposing a PIL by N Selvathirumal, an ex-service man, seeking a direction to authorities to make it mandatory for all private schools in the state to sing the national anthem during the assembly.
The bench while recording the stand of the authorities including Union of India that national anthem ought to be sung, in its order directed Central and State Departments of Secondary Education and the Union Human Resources Department to make endeavours to verify weather national anthem was sung in all private schools in the state.
Selvathiurumal submitted that national anthem was not sung in various private schools in Tamil Nadu while it was sung in central Government Schools such as Kendriya Vidyalaya and all the state government schools daily during the morning assembly.
A citizen should have adequate knowledge of the national anthem and the national flag, the petitioner submitted.
"In pursuance to a RTI reply, I was informed that the government of India has released an advisory for all the schools that the day's work may start with with community singing of the national anthem and adequate provisions should be made in the programmes for popularizing the singing of the anthem and promoting respect for the national flag," he said.
The CBSE submitted that "a circular was issued to schools on November 10, 2015, stating that the second descriptor out of the 10 principles entails singing of national anthem with decorum, where as the first one is to abide by constitution and respect its ideals and institutions, the National Flag and National Anthem in compliance of the direction given by the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta on 22.09.2014. It is notified that the schools must strictly comply the orders."
"We would expect that keeping in mind the mandate of the Constitution of India, the respect for the National Anthem and the National Flag, the circular issued by the CBSE and other authorities, singing of the national anthem would be taking place in various institutions", the bench said.
Cinema: the anthem as part of the script
The Kabhi Khushi Kabhie Gham case
AmitAnand Choudhary, Same judge earlier objected to KJo film, Dec 01 2016 : The Times of India
Dec 01 2016 : The Times of India Judge banned Johar's K3G over anthem scene
[Nov 2016 was] not the first time Supreme Court judge Justice Dipak Misra had delivered an order banning the commercial exploitation of the national anthem. While heading a bench of the Madhya Pradesh high court in 2003, he had banned the screening of Karan Johar's blockbuster `Kabhi Khushi Kabhie Gham' before the SC set aside the verdict.
The dramatisation of the national anthem is against constitutional philosophy .“ This was the verdict Justice Dipak Misra delivered in 2003, while heading a bench in the MP high court, to ban “Kabhi Khushi Kabhie Gham“, reports Amit Anand Choudhary. The bench also said the audience did not stand up for the scene.
The Supreme Court set aside the order after the Centre said the audience did not have to stand up when the anthem is depicted in a film.
Taking strong exception to a sequence in the film -wherein the son of two of the protagonists falters on the pitch while singing the anthem and stops, with his mother then singing the remaining part -Justice Misra had held that “the national anthem has been sung as if it is a song of advertisement for a commercial purpose“ and banned the film's screening unless the scene was deleted.
“The boy sings one part and the mother sings the rest, may be the last five words...But the fact remains that the boy says `sorry' in the midst of the anthem and mother after some time completes the same. All this has been done to create a dramatic impact in the picture for the benefit of the producer,“ Justice Misra wrote in the judgment issued on July 24, 2003. “This should not be allowed to be done for the popularisation of the national anthem as has been understood in this great country ,“ he added. The Madhya Pradesh bench had watched the film and concluded that it disrespected the national anthem as the (largely British) audience depicted in the film did not stand up when the boy started singing the anthem.
“Watching the necessary part of the picture we do not see any laudable purpose. On the contrary , it is for benefit of the individual. Collective sensitivity and national feeling cannot be violated. Corrosive attitude in regard to honour of the national sentiment is totally impermissible. The dramatisation of the national anthem is against constitutional philosophy ,“ Justice Misra wrote.
“That apart, in our considered view the national an them, which is the glory of the country and portrays the unity of the country , cannot be shown in a variety show or a cultural programme of a school as an item... The national anthem is a song of dignity...“ Justice Misra had said.
Johar had approached the SC challenging HC order. A three-judge bench headed by the then Chief Justice of India V N Khare set aside the order after the Centre contended that the audience did not need to stand up when the singing of national anthem is depicted in a film.
As the SC had set aside the HC order, people aggrieved by the Nov 2016 order may ask the court to refer the issue of commercial exploitation of the national anthem to a larger bench.
Needn't stand if anthem is in film
AmitAnand Choudhary, SC: Needn't stand for anthem if it's in film, Feb 15, 2017: The Times of India
There is no need to compulsorily stand up when the national anthem is sung or played as part of a film or documentary , the Supreme Court said on Tuesday while clarifying its earlier order in the wake of reports that people were assaulted for not rising when the anthem was played during a film.
In its earlier order, the apex court had invoked what it called “constitutional patriotism“ to say that people need to stand up when the national anthem was played before the screening of a film.
However, it was not clear whether the requirement to show deference to the national anthem applied even when it was played as part of the script. The court's clarification followed reports of people being beaten and bullied in cinema halls for not standing up for the national anthem when it was played in the middle of Aamir Khan-starrer `Dangal'. It is clarified that when the national anthem is sung or played in the storyline of a feature film or as part of the newsreel or docu or as part of the newsreel or documentary , apart from what has been stated in the order dated November 30, 2016, the audience need not stand,“ a bench of Justices Dipak Misra and R Banumathi said.
It, however, said the apex court's interim order, making it mandatory for cinema halls to play the national anthem before screening of films, would continue.
Importantly , as part of the arguments on Tuesday , attorney general Mukul Rohatgi said singing the anthem should be made mandatory in schools as part of instilling patriotism in the population.
The court had said in its November order that the national anthem must be played in all cinema halls before a film was screened and everyone present must stand up.
The SC order was criticised by some sections and several petitions filed seeking recall of the verdict.Challenging the SC's direction, senior advocate Rajeev Dhawan said the court shouldn't have passed the order as making the national anthem mandatory at places of entertainment was “popcorn nationalism“ and amounted to “moral policing“.
The Centre, however, stoutly defended the court's order and said there was no compulsion to sing the national anthem but people must stand up. Rohatgi also said singing of national anthem should be made mandatory in schools.
Senior advocate C U Singh, appearing for Kodungallur Film Society, said forcing the national anthem on people in cinema halls would not promote nationalism.
The bench, after hearing all sides, said it didn't mean to do moral policing and the issue needed to be debated in a larger perspective.“Our order may be correct or may be incorrect. This has to be debated and decided after hearing all sides,“ it said while posting the case for final disposal on April 18.
Commentaries and views
Justice Markandey Katju’s commentary
The following is a verbatim reproduction of Justice Markandey Katju’s commentary on the National Anthem. These are the views of Justice Markandey Katju and not those of the Indpaedia team, which wishes that Justice Markandey Katju had used Gurudev’s own English translation instead [which Indpaedia has done on this page].
Secondly, Gurudev had himself rubbished the British King George the Fifth myth (as Indpaedia has recorded on this page).
Contrary views by scholars/ researchers/ authorities on the subject may please be sent as messages to the Facebook community, Indpaedia.com. All information used will be gratefully acknowledged in the contributor’s name.
Justice Markandey Katju is a former Judge of the Supreme Court of India.
From the website Justice Katju.blogspot:
SATYAM BRUYAT - Justice Katju
Monday, 20 April 2015
The British stooge Tagore and the National Anthem
There is a controversy as to whether the Indian National Anthem 'Jana Gana Mana ' was written by Rabindra Nath Tagore ( see my blogs ' Tagore ' and ' Tagore and Sharad Chandra ' on justicekatju.blogspot.in ) in praise of God, or as sycophancy in praise of the British King George the Fifth.
In my opinion the evidence is strongly in favour of the second view.
To explain, let me first quote the Engish [sic] translation of the song :
" Victory to thee, O ruler of the minds of the people,
O Dispenser of India's destiny.
Thy name rouses the hearts of Punjab, Sindh,
Gujarat and Maratha,
Of the Dravida, Odisha and Bengal;
It echoes in the hills of the Vindhyas and Himalayas,
mingles in the music of Yamuna and Ganges and is
chanted by the waves of the Indian Sea.
We get up with your blessed name on our lips
We pray for your auspicious blessings
Thou dispenser of India's destiny.
Victory, victory, victory to thee."
Now a few things must be noted about this song :
1.The song was composed at precisely the time of the visit of the British King George the Fifth and Queen Mary in December, 1911
2.The poem does not indicate any love for the Motherland.
3. The ' Adhinayak ' ( Lord or Ruler ) is being hailed. Who was the ruler of India in 1911 ? It was the British, headed by their King-Emperor.
4. Who was the ' Bharat Bhagya Vidhata ' ( dispenser of India's destiny) at that time ? It was none but the British , since they were ruling India in 1911.
5.The song was sung for the first time in India on the second day of the Calcutta Conference of the Congress Party in December 1911. This Conference was held specially to give a loyal welcome to King George the Fifth, and to thank him for annulling the Partition of Bengal in 1905.
6. The agenda of the second day of the Calcutta Conference , in which the song was sung, was specially reserved for giving a loyal welcome to George the Fifth, and a resolution was adopted unanimously that day welcoming and expressing loyalty to the Emperor and Empress.
7. It was only as late as in 1937, when he wanted to show himself as a patriot, that Tagore denied that he had written the song to honour the British King
The above facts almost conclusively prove that ' Jana Gana Mana ' was composed and sung as an act of sycophancy to the British King.
And we have proudly adopted this song as our national anthem !
Jai Ho !
Posted by Justice Markandey Katju at Monday, April 20, 2015
The Besant Theosophical College’s association
RABINDRANATH TAGORE AND NATIONAL ANTHEM-JANA GANA MANA
Jana Gana Mana is the national anthem of India. Written in highly Sanskritized (Tatsama) Bengali, it is the first of five stanzas of a Brahmo hymn composed and scored byNobel laureate Rabindranath Tagore. It was first sung at the Calcutta Session of the Indian National Congress on 27 December 1911. It was originally called Morning Song of India Jana Gana Mana was officially adopted by the Constituent Assembly as the Indian National Anthem on January 24, 1950. A formal rendition of the national anthem takes fifty-two seconds. A shortened version consisting of the first and last lines (and taking about 20 seconds to play) is also staged occasionally. Tagore wrote down the English translation of the song and along with Margaret Cousins (an expert in European music and wife of Irish poet James Cousins) and set down the notation at Madanapalle, which is followed till this day. It is of interest that another poem by Tagore (Amar Shonar Bangla) is the national anthem of Bangladesh.
Rabindranath Tagore translated Jana Gana Mana from Bengali to English and also set it to music in our town Madanapalle. Please see the transcript.
Though the Bengali song was written in 1911, it was largely unknown except to the readers of the Brahmo Samaj journal, "Tatva Bodha Prakasika", of which Tagore was the editor.
During 1918-19, Tagore accepted an invitation from his friend and Irish poet James H. Cousins, the former Principal of our College to spend a few days in the College Campus. On the evening of February 28, he joined a gathering of students and upon Cousins' request, sang the Jana Gana Mana in Bengali. In the days that followed, enchanted by the dreamy hills of Madanapalle, Tagore wrote down the English translation of the song and along with Cousins' wife, Mrs. Margaret Cousins (an expert in Western music), set down the notation which is followed till this day.
Today, in the library of our College the framed photocopy of English translation [which has been used on this page] is displayed. Cottage where Tagore stayed from 25-02-1919 to 02-03-1919 and translated the present National Anthem into English is located in the premises of our College.
Code of conduct:
There are few set rules about reciting "Jana Gana Mana" which includes not singing it under any cover or under any imperfect state of mind. Not doing so is to show disrespect to the national anthem. Rule related to not singing Jana Gana Mana under any cover corresponds to the freedom of yourself and hence of your country while the other rule just of mind may lead in incorrect recitations which is again a disregard to our country.
Soli Sorabjee’s view
Soli J Sorabjee, Judicial Authoritarianism, Dec 5, 2016: The Times of India Supreme Court's order on national anthem dilutes constitutional freedoms and must be reviewed
One unmistakable indication of a nation which professes to be democratic and tolerant is: Does it accord freedom only to accepted and acceptable ideas and beliefs or does it also accord freedom to the thought we hate? The latter is the essence of freedom and tolerance. The Supreme Court judgment pronounced in August 1986, in the case of Bijoe Emmanuel vs State of Kerala, was a ringing affirmation of this principle.
In the memorable words of Justice Chinnappa Reddy who headed the Bench “our tradition teaches tolerance; our philosophy preaches tolerance; our Constitution practices tolerance; let us not dilute it“. The recent interim orders and judgment of the Supreme Court dated 30 November dilute, in substance, the philosophy of tolerance.
No doubt the intent of the Supreme Court Bench, headed by Justice Dipak Misra who passed the interim orders, was good. However, the methodology prescribed and the measures it has mandated are based on questionable assumptions. Under Article 51-A of the Constitution it is the fundamental duty of every citizen inter alia to respect the national anthem. And therefore, according to the Supreme Court order, every person has to stand up when the national anthem is played to prove his patriotism.
This is a novel notion of patriotism.It assumes that the acid test of patriotism is to stand up when the national anthem is played. This reminds me of Samuel Johnson's famous quip that “patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel“. Surely there are other ways of showing respect for the national anthem than by standing up in cinema halls when the anthem is played. Many people who stand up may well be scoundrels and devoid of any sentiment of patriotism.
The assumption that making people stand when national anthem is played will instill a sense of `constitutional' patriotism is fallacious. There may be diverse reasons why a person may not stand up when the national anthem is played. For example, physical difficulty in standing up; or genuine religious or conscientious reasons.
Persons belonging to the Jehovah's Witnesses sect, for instance, do not sing the national anthem wherever, Jana Gana Mana in India, God save the Queen in Britain, the Star Spangled Banner in the United States and so on. They desist from singing because of their genuine belief that their religion does not permit them to do so.
In the words of the Supreme Court in the aforesaid Bijoe Emmanuel case, they do not hold their beliefs idly and their conduct is not the outcome of any perversity . Their reasons may appear bizarre but if the belief is genuine and conscientiously held then it is protected under the fundamental right of freedom of conscience guaranteed by Article 25 of the Constitution. Judicially mandated duty of a citizen cannot override his or her fundamental rights.
It must be remembered that any person who intentionally prevents the singing of the national anthem or causes disturbances to any assembly engaged in such singing can be punished under the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971. No one can object to this statutory provision.
Way back in 1909, a question arose before the Bombay High Court whether the belief of a Parsi Zoroastrian making gifts in favour of what he believed to be the advancement of his religion and the welfare of his community or mankind was reasonable. Justice Davar held that “a secular judge is bound to accept that belief it is not for him to sit in judgment on that belief, if that belief is genuinely and conscientiously held“.
The Supreme Court in Bijoe Emmanuel approved of Justice Davar's dictum and ruled that “the question is not whether a particular religious belief or practice appeals to reason or sentiment .... Our personal views are irrelevant. If the belief is genuinely and conscientiously held it attracts the protection of Article 25“.These salutary principles have been overlooked in the Supreme Court's recent interim directions which sadly make no reference to the Supreme Court's judgment in Bijoe Emmanuel.
Furthermore the Supreme Court's interim directions are incapable of effective implementation. Who will determine and how will it be determined how many cinema goers did not stand up and what were their reasons for not standing up? Besides how many of them were non-citizens who are not obliged to comply with the fundamental duties imposed on citizens under Article 51-A? Such directions betray judicial overzealousness to intervene in matters which are beyond the judicial sphere.The judiciary rightly commands the executive not to transgress the lakshman rekha. With utmost respect, the judiciary should also observe its lakshman rekha, which is to refrain from dealing with matters which are inherently beyond the judicial ken.
The worrying part is that these directions, though certainly well intended, could well usher in judicial authoritarianism based on the belief that judges are infallible and are the best persons to administer the country . It would also provide ammunition to those opposed to judicial activism, and worse, portray the judiciary in a ludicrous light. It is earnestly hoped that the Bench which passed these directions will reconsider them at the next hearing keeping all relevant constitutional, legal and practical aspects in mind.
See also
National Anthem: India
