LexV.K. NASWA versus HOME SECRETARY, U.O.I. AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B [2012) 2 S.C.R. 912 V.K. NASWA v. HOME SECRETARY, U.0.1. AND ORS. (Writ Petition (Civil) No. 533 of 2011) JANUARY 09, 2012 [DR. B.S. CHAUHAN AND SWATANTER KUMAR, JJ.] Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 32 - Writ petition against respondents alleging that they insulted the National C Flag and violated the norms of waiving of National Flag, as provided in the Flag Code 2002 - Petitioner seeking relief that a sum of Rupees Ten Crores be recovered from one respondent for misusing National Flag for gaining undue mileage benefiting his commercial ends as well as the political o gain drive during agitations and other respondents be directed to pay Rupees Ten Crores to Prime Minister's Relief Fund for _ using/misusing National Flag for gaining undue mileage ·· during agitations - Also sought issuance of direction to the Central Government through Ministry of Law & Justice to E revise the Flag Code of India 2002 and amend the same incorporating the amendment suggested by the petitioner himself - Held: National Flag is both a benediction and a beckoning - In case a person shows any kind of disrespect to the National Flag or does not observe the terms contained F in the Code, legal action may be taken against him under the relevant statutory provisions - However, these are factual issues whether on a particular event a particular person showed any kind of disrespect to the National Flag - For that purpose, the pe_titioner has already filed criminal complaints G before the police authorities - Thus, he cannot pursue the remedy simultaneously by filing the writ petition - More so, such a factual controversy cannot be examined in a petition under Article 32 - Neither the Court can legislate, nor it has any competence to issue directions to the legislature to enact the law in a particular manner - The court has very limited H 912 V.K. NASWA v. HOME SECRETARY, U.0.1. 913 role and in exercise of that it is not open to judicial legislation A - Thus, no interference is called for- Flag Code of India 2002. Union of India v. Naveen Jindal & Anr. AIR 2004 SC 1559; Mullikarjuna Rao & Ors. etc. etc. v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. etc. etc., AIR 1990 SC 1251; V.K. Sood v. 8 Secretary, Civil Aviation & Ors., AIR 1993 SC 2285; M/s. Narinder Chand .Hem Raj & Ors. v. Lt. Governor, Administrator, Union Territory, Himachal Pradesh & Ors. AIR 1971 SC 2399; State of Himachal Pradesh v. A Parent of a Student of Medical College, Shim/a & Ors. AIR 1985 SC 910; C Asif Hameed & Ors. v. State of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors. AIR 1989 SC 1899; Union of India & Anr. v. Deoki Nandan Aggarwal AIR 1992 SC 96; Ajaib Singh v. Sirhind Co- operative Marketing-cum-Processing Service Society Ltd. & Anr. AIR 1999 SC 1351; Union of India v. Association for Democratic Reforms & Anr. AIR 2002 SC 2112'; District D Mining Officer & Ors. v. Tata Iron & Steel Co. & Anr. (2001) 7 SCC 358; Supreme Court Employees' Welfare Association v. Union of India & Anr. (1989) 4 SCC 187; State of Jammu & Kashmir v. A.R. Zakki & Ors. AIR 1992 SC 1546; Union of India v. Prakash P. Hinduja & Anr., AIR 2003 SC 2612; E University of Kera/a v. Council, Principals', Colleges, Kera/a & Ors. AIR 2010 SC 2532; State of U.P. & Ors. v. Jeet S. Bisht & Anr. (2007) 6 SCC 586; Delhi Jal Board v. National Campaign for Dignity and Rights of Sewerage and Allied Workers & Ors. (2011) 8 SCC 568; Vishaka & Ors. v. State F of Rajasthan & Ors. AIR 1997 SC 3011; Common Cause (A Regd. Society) v. Union of India & Ors. AIR 2008 SC 2116; Destruction of Public and Private Properties v. State of A. P. & Ors., AIR 2009 SC 2266 - relied on. Case Law Reference: 2004 (1) SCR 1038 1990 (2) SCR 418 1993 (3) SCR 772 Relied on Relied on Relied on Para 3 Para 6 Para 6 G H 914 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2012) 2 S.C.R. A 1972 SCR 940 Relied on Para 7 1985 (3) SCR 676 Relied. on Para 8 1989 (3) SCR 19 Relied on Para 9 B AIR 1992 SC 96 Relied on Para 10 1999 (2) SCR 505 Relied on Para 11 2002 (3) SCR 696 Relied on Para 12 2001 (1) Suppl. SCR 147 Relied on Para 13 c 1989 (3) SCR 488 Relied on Para 14 1991 (3) Suppl. SCR 216 Relied on Para 14 2003 (1) Suppl. SCR 307 Relied on Para 15 D 2009 (15) SCR 800 Relied on Para 16 2007 (7 ) SCR 705 Relied on Para 17 (2011) 8 sec 568 Relied on Para 18 E 1997 (3) Suppl. SCR 404 Relied on Para 18 2008 (6) SCR 262 Relied on Para 18 2009 (6) SCR 439 Relied on Pa
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.