Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday heard a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by senior counsel and activist Girish Bharadwaj challenging the state government’s decision regarding the singing of Vande Mataram at government events.
A Division Bench headed by Justice Anu Shivaraman, along with Justice T.P. Vivekananda, took up the matter. Senior advocate Angad Kamath appeared for the petitioner, while Advocate General Shashi Kiran Shetty represented the Karnataka government.
Arguing on behalf of the petitioner, Kamath contended that decisions concerning the National Anthem and National Song should be governed by the Union government and cannot be independently altered by state governments.
He submitted that the Union Home Ministry has issued notifications prescribing the manner in which the National Anthem and National Song should be sung. According to the petitioner, Vande Mataram consists of six stanzas and the prescribed rendition takes around 3.10 minutes. He argued that the Centre has also issued guidelines on the manner in which the song should be sung.
Kamath further contended that the state Cabinet’s decision to curtail the rendition of Vande Mataram suffered from procedural lapses. He claimed that no department had formally proposed curtailing the song and that the Cabinet decision was taken without a proper Cabinet note or supporting document.
He argued that matters concerning national symbols, including the National Emblem and National Anthem, fall within the domain of the Union government and that states cannot independently prescribe separate rules.
Opposing the PIL, Advocate General Shashi Kiran Shetty questioned the circumstances in which the petition was filed. He submitted that the petitioner made the submission on a holiday and approached the court the very next day.
Shetty also referred to proceedings before the Supreme Court concerning Vande Mataram and submitted that the Centre had stated before the apex court that singing the National Song was not compulsory, while the National Anthem was mandatory.
He argued that singing the entire Vande Mataram was not mandatory and that, since 1932, only two stanzas have generally been sung on such occasions.
He also referred to a communication from the Joint Secretary of the Union government to the Chief Secretaries of states, which, according to him, specified occasions on which the song could be sung and referred to the use of two stanzas at state government events.
The Advocate General further alleged that the petitioner had made an incorrect statement in his affidavit by claiming that he was not associated with any organisation. He alleged that the petitioner had links with a political party and contended that political considerations were behind the PIL.
Kamath, however, maintained that Vande Mataram is recognised as the National Song and argued that the Supreme Court had not prescribed how many stanzas should be sung. He said the apex court had dealt with the issue of showing respect when the song was played but had not determined the number of stanzas to be sung.
He further argued that the Centre should clarify the number of stanzas to be sung and that its directions should be followed by state governments. According to the petitioner, the Centre’s instructions were not merely advisory and the state government was required to comply with them.
The arguments before the Division Bench come amid a controversy over the Karnataka government’s decision concerning the rendition of Vande Mataram at official events.
It can be noted that Union Education Minister Pralhad Joshi warned that the BJP would raise the issue in Parliament against the Karnataka government for restricting the rendition of Vande Mataram to only two stanzas.
BJP and JD(S) MLAs on Monday sang the full version of Vande Mataram inside the Karnataka Legislature, defying the state government’s directive to restrict the rendition to two stanzas.
(IANS)
