Allahabad High Court
Mr. Suresh Kumar Gupta, Advocate vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy.,Law & ... on 3 February, 2017
Bench: Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, Sanjay Harkauli
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 1 Case :- P.I.L. CIVIL No. - 1928 of 2017 Petitioner :- Mr. Suresh Kumar Gupta, Advocate Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy.,Law & Legal Remembranc & Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- S.K. Gupta (In person) Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ankit Pande,U.N. Mishra Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J.
Hon'ble Sanjay Harkauli,J.
This petition in Public Interest has been filed by a practicing Advocate contending that there is a moral and constitutional obligation to ensure the daily recital of the National Anthem inside the premises of the High Court as well as District Courts, Tribunals and other such establishments. The petitioner appears to be inspired by the order of the Apex Court in the recent case of Shyam Narayan Chouksey v. Union of India, Writ Petition (Civil) No.855/2016 dated 30.11.2016.
Certain directions have been issued therein and while referring to Article 51A (a) of the Fundamental Duties contained in Chapter Part-IV-A of the Constitution of India, it has been observed that a time has come that the citizens of the country realize that they are duty bound to show respect to the National Anthem being the symbol of the Constitutional Patriotism and inherent national quality.
The contention of the petitioner is that even Courts should rise each morning and begin the day with the singing of the National Anthem.
Article 51A (a) of the Constitution of India reads as under:-
"51A. Fundamental duties -- It shall be the duty of every citizen of India -
(a) to abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals and institutions, the National Flag and the National Anthem."
This has been incorporated as a fundamental duty under the Directive Principles of State Policy and the Apex Court's direction indicates it to be a duty of every citizen to show respect to the National Anthem. Accordingly, the Apex Court has issued directions for playing the National Anthem in all cinema halls in India before the start of a feature film and all present in the hall have been obliged to stand up to show respect to the National Anthem.
Duty in it's real sense means what one is obliged to perform and not what people think about it. This duty should be done well, even if painful or otherwise compulsory. No phase of life, whether public or private, can be free from duty. Life itself is a duty that has been endowed by the Almighty and it's performance and upkeep is the obligation of every human being. This performance of duty determines man's mortal destiny. It is an honour for a responsible citizen to remember and perform his duty. We citizens of the country also owe this to our Nation, and to realize this, our Constitution embodies within itself the chapter of Fundamental Duties introduced by the 42nd Amendment Act, 1976. There are some duties which remain patriotically undivided, and one of them is to show respect to the symbol of the Nation, whether it is the National Flag or the National Anthem, and it is for this reason that the same has found place in Article 51A (a) of the Constitution of India.
Patriotism is a lively sense of collective responsibility. It has it's roots in the life of one's Country and cannot be termed as a secular religion. It is a kind of religion as described by Guy De Maupassant as under:-
"Patriotism is a kind of religion; it is the egg from which wars are hatched."
True patriotism is not the belonging of any political party as it neither knows latitude nor longitude. It only fosters love for one's Country and respect for one's belonging to a Nation. The sense of belonging is therefore an inherent feeling and not a matter of compulsion. The feeling is therefore natural and reaffirms the sense of belonging to a Nation. Great people have expressed patriotic feelings and love for their country in very sublime words and Shakespeare in his play Coriolanus expressed his feelings of placing respect for his country more than his own life in the following words:-
"I do love My country's good with a respect more tender, More holy and profound, than mine own life."
The National Anthem no doubt is also an expression of patriotism and our belief in the Constitution that governs the Nation.
The issue here is as to whether such duty and patriotism should be a matter of chant every morning in a Court of Law. The High Court, the District Courts or the Tribunals are all established under the Constitution itself. The State Judiciary has been constituted under Chapter V and Chapter VI of the Constitution of India where the High Courts in the States and the Subordinate Courts find their place of establishment. The High Courts have been given power to frame their own Rules as they are Courts of Record. The Allahabad High Court has framed it's Rules, namely, Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952. The High Court is not only run by Rules but also by deep rooted traditions that have been fostered from times immemorial, and particularly after India has gained independence being governed by the Constitution. The High Court also exercises supervisory control over the Subordinate Courts and the Tribunals. The performance of all functions including judicial and administrative are therefore well within the administrative control and superintendence of the High Court.
There has been no tradition of singing of the National Anthem either inside Courts or in it's offices as a matter of daily routine every day, and to the best of the information to this Court, such is also not the practice in the Supreme Court.
To show respect to the National Anthem is one aspect but to sing it daily in the name of patriotism as a matter of daily routine before discharging official functions either inside the Court or in it's offices has never been the practice nor was it introduced ever before. The order dated 30.11.2016 in the case of Sham Narayan Chouksey (supra) nowhere gives any indication for such performance either inside Courts or even outside it in it's offices. There is no mandate of such a performance, and the High Court being an institution of judicial autonomy, has nowhere framed any such Rules that may run counter to the letter and spirit of a fundamental duty. There is no mandate either under the law for such recital and chanting of the National Anthem on a daily routine basis nor is there any tradition to that effect. We have not been informed of any such practice of any High Court as well throughout the country.
There is a difference between a prayer to the divine and the recital of a National Anthem. A routine prayer to the divine is a self-imposed discipline which one does for spiritual gains. This is pure morality and belief in religion and is personal. The recital of a National Anthem cannot be equated with such a divine prayer so as to compel it's recital by the officials of a public institution as a routine exercise so as to instill any patriotism or sense of duty. In our opinion, the performance of a duty is more essential, as work is real worship. To respect the National Anthem is to believe in it and believe in the true ideals of our Constitution. A performance of a daily singing of the National Anthem in Courts may not by itself be a reflection of Constitutional respect.
In the above background, we dismiss this petition with the faith and hope that everybody concerned would continue to respect the National Anthem as desired and as expected, but we find ourselves unable to issue any such compulsive direction by way of a mandate, as prayed for in this writ petition.
Order Date :- 3.2.2017 lakshman [Sanjay Harkauli, J.] [Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, J.]