SC Dismisses Premature Challenge to Mandatory 'Vande Matram' Directive as Advisory Only
The Supreme Court on Wednesday refused a petition challenging the Home Ministry's circular regarding Vande Bharat trains, ruling that its directive is advisory rather than mandatory. A bench described an apprehension of discrimination based solely on religious grounds and dismissed arguments claiming no penalty was prescribed for non-compliance as vague or premature claims by senior advocate Sanjay Hegde representing Noori Abdul Rahim Khan.
Key Points
-
1The Supreme Court refused a petition challenging the Ministry of Home Affairs' directive requiring singing 'Vande Mataram', stating it is an advisory rather than mandatory.
-
2A bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant dismissed the plea as premature, citing vague apprehensions without material evidence to support claims of discrimination or compulsion.
Developments
Perspectives
The Supreme Court dismissed a petition filed by Muhammed Sayeed Noori challenging the Ministry of Home Affairs' advisory regarding singing 'Vande Mataram', ruling that such directives are not mandatory.
— 'Advisory, Not Mandatory': SC Dismisses 'Premature' Plea Against MHA Circular On Vande Matram (Timesnownews)"The plea filed was termed premature and based on a vague apprehension of discrimination," according to the Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant.
— 'Vague apprehension of discrimination': SC bins plea against MHA circular on 'Vandemataram'Senior advocate Sanjay Hegde, representing Noori in court, stated that while he respects every religion and faith in India, some individuals may feel compelled to participate if forced regardless their religious background.
— "Advisory Not Mandatory": SC Dismisses Plea Against MHA Circular On 'Vande Mataram'The Supreme Court noted there was no material evidence or coercive action demonstrated by the petitioner in support of his claim that singing national songs violates rights based on religion and faith.
— "SC Bins plea against Vandematram circular": Terms it "vague apprehension"The Supreme Court dismissed Muhammed Sayeed Noori's plea against the Home Ministry circular on singing "Vande Mataram," ruling it premature based on vague allegations rather than specific evidence. The bench clarified that since Union Government directive Clause 5 uses permissive language ("may"), no one can be legally compelled to sing, and further legal action is only permissible if penal consequences or notices are actually imposed in the future.