BIJOE EMMANUEL & ORS. versus STATE OF KERALA & ORS.

Citation: [1986] 3 S.C.R. 518 · Decided: 11-08-1986 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: O. CHINNAPPA REDDY · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 13 judgment(s) · cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
BIJOE EMMANUEL & ORS. 
v. 
STATE OF KERALA & ORS. 
B 
AUGUST 11, 1986 
[0. CHINNAPPA REDDY AND M.M. DUTT, JJ.] 
c 
Constitution o.f India, Art. 
19(/)(a) and 25(/)-National 
Anthem-Singing o.f-Compulsion despite genuine conscientious religi-
ous objection-Whether contravenes Fundamental Rights. 
, 
D 
Prevention o.f Insult to National Honour Act, 1960, s. 3-
National Anthem-Singing o.f-Re.fusal on genuine conscientious religi-
ous faith-Whether offence committed. 
Kera/a Education Act, 1959 read with the Kera/a Education 
Rules, 1959, s. 36, Chapter IX Rule 6--National Anthem-Singing o.f-
Refusal by school pupils on genuine conscientious religious faith-
Whether misconduct entitling censure suspension dismissal of pupil. 
E 
_The appellants-three children belong to a sect called Jehovah's 
Witnesses who ·worship only Jehovah-the Creator and none other. 
They refused to sing the National Anthem: 'Jana Gana Mana' because, 
according to them, it is against the tenets of their religious faith-not 
the words or the thoughts of the Nl!tional Anthem-but the singing of it. 
4
F 
They desisted from actual singing only because of their aforesaid 
honest belief and conviction but they used to stand up in respectful -J 
silence daily, during the morning assembly when the National Anthem 
' 
was sung. 
A Conunission was appointed to enquire and report, and it re-
G 
ported that the children were "law abiiling" and that they showed no 
disrespect to the National Anthem. However, under the instructions of 
Deputy Inspector of Schools, the Head Mistress expelled the appellants 
from school from July 26, 1985. 
A represe'ltation by the father of the children to the Education 
H 
Authorities requesting that the children may be permitted to attend the 
518 
' 
• • 
I 
.4. 
B. EMMANUEL v. STATE 
519 
school pending orders from the Government having failed, the appel-
lants filed a Writ Petition in the High Court seeking an order restrain-
ing the authorities from preventing them from attending the school. A 
single Judge and then a Division Bench rejected the prayer of the 
appellants. 
Allowing tGe appeal hy Special Leave, to this Court, 
HELD: I. I. The Fnndamental Rights of the appellants under 
Art. J9(1)(a) and 25(1) have been infringed and they are entitled to be 
protected. The expulsion of the three children from the school for the 
reason that because of their conscientiously held religious faith, they do 
not join the singing of the National Anthem in the niorning assembly 
though they do stand respectfully when the National Anthem is sung, is 
a violation of the fundamental right to freedom of conscience and freely 
to profess, practice and propagate religion. Therefore, the judgine11t of 
the High Court is set aside and the respondent antborities are directed 
,.,to-~admit the children into the school, to permit them to pursue their 
studies without hindrance and to facilitate the pursuit of their studies by 
giving them the necessary facilities. [538D-E; 539-C-D] 
1.2 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. Proper respect is shown to the National 
Anthem by standing up when the National Anthem is sung. It will not be 
right to say that disrespect is shown by not joining in the singing. 
Standing up respectfully when the National Anthem is sung but not 
singing oneself clearly does not either prevent the singing of the 
National Anthem or cause disturbance to an assembly engaged in suCh 
singing so as to constitute the offence mentioned in s. 3 of the Prevention 
oflnsults to National Honour Act. [5l7B-G] 
2.1 Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution guarantees to all citizens 
freedom of speech and expression, but Article 19(2) provides that nothing 
in Article 19(1)(a) sball prevent a State from making any law, in so far as 
such law imposes reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the said right. 
Art. 25(1) guarantees !o all persons freedom of conscience and tlte right 
freely to pi:ofess, practise and propagate religion, subject to order, mora-
lity and health and to the other provisions of Part l!ll of the Constitution. 
Art. 51-A(a) of the Constitution enjoins a duty on e-•ery citizen of India 
"to abide by the Constitution and respect Its ideals and institutions, the 
National Flag and the National Anthem''. [526G·H; 527C] 
A 
B 
c 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.