BIJOE EMMANUEL Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE theme of this appeal is the National Anthem of India. The appellants are the petitioners in a writ petition. The petitioners complained that singing the National Anthem offended their religious freedom. The learned Judge thought otherwise. And his judgment has given rise to the appeal now before us. Background of the writ petition:

(2.) . The petitioners were the students, of an age range of ten to fourteen, in a school near Kottayam. They belong to the religious sect known as "Jehovah's Witnesses." The school has its morning assembly of all the students. In conformity with the instructions of the Educational authorities in the State, the students are to chant the National Anthem and take a pledge before they proceed to their class rooms and commence their studies. According to the petitioners, the chanting of the National Anthem 'Jana Gana @page-KLT228# ((THELAW)) 2009 KLT INFOTECH Ver DIS � Page 2 of 271986 KLT 227 Mana' is opposed to their religious tenets, which uncompromisingly insist upon the worship of Jehovah and none else as the God. Singing the National Anthem, according to them, involves worship of a God or a concept other than Jehovah, and therefore constitutes an infringement of a valuable Fundamental Right of religious freedom. The Schools and the singing of 'Jana Gana Mana':

(3.) . On receipt of a complaint about the refusal of the petitioners to sing the National Anthem, the Deputy Director of Education visited the school on 25-7-1985. There was an appraisal of the situation by the Deputy Director himself. The attitude and approach of the students were ascertained from them directly. In the wake of deliberations that followed the Headmistress insisted upon the petitioners also singing the National Anthem. The petitioners did not budge from their stand. The school also was rigid in its attitude. A request to exempt the children from singing, awaiting a further GoVer nment Order, was not acceded to by the School. The petitioners then felt that they should seek through this Court, relief against what @page-KLT229# they felt to be a denial of the freedom of religion under Art.25 and 26 as also the freedom of speech guaranteed under Art.19(1) (a) of the Constitution. The Original Petition was filed soon thereafter. Respondents in the case and their contentions: