Introduction The Framers of the Indian Constitution took as long as 2 years, 11 months and 18 days to draft the longest Written Constitution in the world. Resulting from several deliberations amongst numerous members of the Constituent Assembly, the final draft of the Constitution of India, 1950 was enacted on the 26th of January, 1949. The original Constitution consisted of 395 articles in 22 parts and 8 schedules. It was ultimately an amalgamation of the best features adopted from various constitutions across the globe. However, these features were delicately moderated to meet the needs and aspirations of Independent India. The most important feature of the Indian Constitution, from the perspective of her citizens, is Part III which deals with Fundamental Rights. This Part discusses the relationship of justice and fairness between the State and the citizens. It enhances the rights that all citizens, and in some cases non-citizens, are guaranteed protection against the State's ar...
Introduction
The Constitution of India consists of Fundamental Rights related to religion which are guaranteed to every person. India is a culturally diverse nation which is why it is important to have laws that protect the rights of all religions. The fundamental right to practice any religion is granted under Articles 25 to 28 of the Constitution of India. One of the cases that throws light on the Right to Freedom of Religion is Bijoe Emmanuel And Ors. v. State of Kerala and Ors., 1985 (1987 AIR 748), also popularly known as "The National Anthem Case". The Petitioners had filed the suit against the Respondent, a school, for the breach of their fundamental right to practice religion. A writ petition was first filed in the High Court of Kerala, seeking an order to restrain the authorities from preventing them to attend the school. The petition was rejected by the single-judge bench and later by the division bench of the Kerala High Court. Following this, the children's father filed an appeal in the Supreme Court of India. The judgment of the said case was delivered in 1987 by the Apex Court.
Facts of the Case
The Petitioners were a body of Christians called the "Jehovah's Witnesses". The "Witnesses" are an association of people who believe that the literal interpretation of the Bible is essential to propagate and profess their religion. The Petitioners stated that they worship only 'Jehovah' (God as per their beliefs) and do not perform any other rituals or actions except such worship. Bijoe Emmanuel is the father of three children namely; Bijou, Binu Mol and Bindu. The pupils worshipping Jehovah (God) abstained from singing the National Anthem because they believe that the religion does not permit them to carry out any rituals except if it is their prayers to Jehovah (God).
As per the doctrines and beliefs of the Jehovah's Witnesses, it is contrary to the practices of their religion to indulge in the singing of the Indian National Anthem. They have submitted that this practice violates their Right to Freedom of Religion as per the Constitution of India. They have also stated that the children of the people belonging to the Jehovah's Witnesses Association faced a hindrance in the education provided to them through the State as they were expelled by their school headmistress for not singing the National Anthem. This step was taken up by the headmistress because a member of the Legislative Assembly had visited the school and had noticed that the children were not singing the National Anthem. The headmistress took a harsh step because of instructions given to her by the Deputy Inspector of Schools.
Issues in the Case
1. Whether the expulsion of 3 students from a school in Kerala justified under the Kerala Education Act (Section 36), Kerala Education Rules (Rules 6 and 9) and Section 3 of the Prevention of Insults to National Honor Act, 1971?
2. Whether the expulsion of the students from the school is consistent with the rights guaranteed under Articles 19 (1) and 25 of the Constitution of India?
Arguments of the Plaintiff
The petitioner had first filed a writ petition in the Kerala High Court seeking an order to restrain the school authorities who prevented the children of the petitioner from attending the school. The petition was rejected by the single as well as the division bench of the High Court. The petitioner then appealed to the Supreme Court by stating that the children did not sing the National Anthem but they did not disrespect it either. The children always stood up in attention whenever the National Anthem was sung. Merely not singing the National Anthem does not count as disrespect according to the argument by the counsel for the petitioner. They did not sing the National Anthem because they genuinely and in a true sense believed that their religion did not allow the same.
Freedom to practice any religion, right to free conscience and to promote and propagate the religion is a fundamental right guaranteed by Article 25(1) of the Constitution of India. The rule of the school that every person is obligated to sing the National Anthem as proposed by the education ministry is violative of Article 25(1) of the Indian Constitution. The council also mentioned that expelling the children from school on this basis is also violative of their Right to Education as per Article 21(a) of the Constitution of India.
Arguments by the Respondent
The counsel for the respondents argued that every school follows certain rules and regulations in Kerala, the "morning assembly" being one of them. These rules are given by the Kerala Education Rules and the Kerala Education Act. The council stressed the fact that not singing the National Anthem is showing disrespect towards it, which was later countered by the counsel for the petitioner. The rules for Education are put forth by the official State Governmental authorities of Kerala. The counsel for the respondent also mentioned that "the Bible" which is the Holy book of the Jehovah's Witnesses, does not command its believers to disrespect the Government Authorities. The learned counsel also mentioned that by not singing the National Anthem, the petitioners refused to discharge their fundamental duty.
Judgment by the High Court of Kerala
The decision given by the Kerala High Court was based on Section 36 of the Kerala Education Act, 1958. As per the provision of the Act, it allows the State Government to impose the provisions of the Act for embarking good education to the students studying in schools. Along with morally and patriotically educating students, the provision also mentioned that students who indulged in fraud or misconduct could be expelled from the school by the school authorities. The schools in Kerala which were included under the ambit of the Education Authorities of the State, followed two Codes of Conduct. One of them was for teachers and students which stressed the inculcation of moral values and patriotism in the minds of the students. The other circular made it mandatory for all schools to conduct a morning assembly in the school which was inclusive of the National Anthem and the National Pledge. The circular also specified that every person needed to attend the assembly. The High Court ruled in favour of the respondents by taking into consideration the rules and regulations specified by the provisions of the Acts and also that the said Acts did not violate Articles 19(1) and 25 of the Constitution of India.
Judgment by the Supreme Court of India
The petitioner went on to file an appeal in the Supreme Court of India as he was not satisfied with the decision of the High Court of Kerala. The Supreme Court went on to find a solution which proved to be a middle ground for the petitioner as well as the respondent. Article 19(1) of the Indian Constitution which grants the Freedom of Speech and Expression as well as Article 25 of the Indian Constitution which grants the Freedom to Practice any Religion would be violated if the students are expected to sing the National Anthem even if the same would be against their faiths.
The Prevention of Insults to National Honor Act, of 1971 is an act which protects the National Flag and other symbols of National importance. The Act is in force to prevent any disrespect towards the National Flag, the National Anthem, the Pledge and other important symbols. Section 3 of the Act provides for the punishment for those who cause hindrance to the playing of the National Anthem or cause disturbance when the National Anthem is being played. The Act does not mention that "refusal to stand up during the National Anthem or refusal to sing it, is disrespectful and does not make the same an offence". Merely not singing the National Anthem does not indicate any sign of disrespect shown by the students who were expelled from school for the same. The Apex Court ruled that the students had not committed the offence of disrespecting the National Anthem and were wrongfully expelled from the school.
Conclusion
As per the legalities in the case summary stated above, merely not singing the National Anthem does not indicate disrespect for the same. Secondly, expelling students for the same is not correct on the part of the school authorities. The students should be inculcated with morality and patriotism by explaining the importance of the same. Expelling the students will not prove to be of great help because it will only worsen the situation by degrading the morale of the students. Lastly, there are certain reasonable restrictions to the Freedom of Religion as per the Constitution of India. Every individual needs to abide by the same and also be aware of which acts are included in the reasonable restrictions and which are not.
References
Comments
Post a Comment