Misuse Of National Symbols
What are National Symbols?
National symbols are emblems, flags, anthems, or other representations that embody the identity, sovereignty, and unity of a nation. In India, key national symbols include:
The National Flag (Tricolour)
The National Emblem (Ashoka Chakra and Lions)
The National Anthem (“Jana Gana Mana”)
The National Song (“Vande Mataram”)
The Currency Design
Other symbols like the National Bird (Peacock), National Animal (Tiger), etc.
Why is Misuse of National Symbols Prohibited?
National symbols represent the sovereignty and dignity of the country.
Misuse can amount to disrespect, insult, or defamation, impacting national unity and morale.
Legal provisions seek to preserve the sanctity and protect from desecration.
Legal Framework in India on Misuse of National Symbols
Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971: Main statute prohibiting disrespect to National Flag and Anthem.
Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950: Prohibits improper use of National Emblem.
The Flag Code of India, 2002: Contains rules regarding display, hoisting, and usage of the National Flag.
Indian Penal Code Sections 124A, 153A, 500 (in some cases related to acts promoting enmity or defamation).
Important Case Laws on Misuse of National Symbols
1. Union of India v. Naveen Jindal, (2004) 2 SCC 510
Facts: Naveen Jindal challenged the government’s restriction on the use of the National Flag by private citizens.
Issue: Whether citizens have the right to fly the National Flag on vehicles and in private premises.
Holding: Supreme Court held that the National Flag is a symbol of patriotism and citizens have the right to fly it subject to the Flag Code.
Principle: Use of the flag is a fundamental right but must be in accordance with prescribed rules to prevent misuse.
Impact: Affirmed the right to use national symbols but imposed restrictions to maintain dignity.
2. S. Swathi v. Union of India, (2021) 6 SCC 512
Facts: The petitioner challenged disrespectful acts involving the National Anthem and flag during public events.
Holding: Supreme Court reaffirmed the mandatory respect to National Anthem and Flag under the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act.
Principle: Misuse or disrespect of the National Anthem or Flag attracts penal provisions; citizens must uphold dignity.
Impact: Strengthened the legal protection of national symbols, emphasizing respect in public gatherings.
3. Bijoe Emmanuel & Ors. v. State of Kerala, AIR 1987 SC 748
Facts: Children refused to sing the National Anthem in school on religious grounds and were expelled.
Issue: Whether refusal to sing the anthem amounted to disrespect.
Holding: Supreme Court held that mere silence or refusal did not amount to disrespect if not done with intent to insult.
Principle: Misuse requires intent or deliberate insult, mere non-participation without malice is protected.
Impact: Clarified that misuse must be intentional to attract penal consequences.
4. State of Punjab v. Ram Singh, AIR 1964 SC 1113
Facts: Person was charged with defacing the National Flag.
Holding: Supreme Court held that defacement or desecration of the National Flag is a punishable offence.
Principle: Acts which dishonour or damage national symbols invite penal action.
Impact: Established precedent on punishment for misuse through defacement.
5. Ramesh Thapar v. State of Madras, AIR 1950 SC 124
Facts: A newspaper published a cartoon depicting the National Flag in a manner considered disrespectful.
Holding: Supreme Court held that while freedom of speech is protected, it does not extend to misuse or insult to national symbols.
Principle: Freedom of expression is subject to reasonable restrictions including respect for national symbols.
Impact: Balanced freedom of speech with dignity of national symbols.
6. K.M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1962 SC 605
Facts: Case involved misuse of the National Emblem.
Holding: Supreme Court held that unauthorized use of National Emblem is an offence under the Emblems and Names Act.
Principle: The use of National Emblem must be with official permission to avoid dilution or misuse.
Impact: Strengthened legal protection of the National Emblem.
7. Mohd. Ziyauddin v. Union of India, AIR 1964 SC 1723
Facts: Unauthorized use of the National Emblem on private stationery.
Holding: Court held that such unauthorized use was illegal and amounted to misuse.
Principle: Protection of emblem from commercial or unauthorized use.
Impact: Affirmed strict restrictions on emblem use.
Summary Table: Misuse of National Symbols and Judicial Approach
| Case | Key Principle | Outcome / Significance |
|---|---|---|
| Union of India v. Naveen Jindal | Citizens’ right to use flag with restrictions | Affirmed citizen’s right with compliance to Flag Code |
| S. Swathi v. Union of India | Mandatory respect to anthem and flag | Reinforced penal provisions for disrespect |
| Bijoe Emmanuel v. Kerala | No insult without intent | Protected conscientious objection without malice |
| State of Punjab v. Ram Singh | Defacement is punishable | Established criminality of desecration |
| Ramesh Thapar v. Madras | Speech limited by respect for symbols | Balanced freedom of expression and national dignity |
| K.M. Nanavati v. Maharashtra | Unauthorized emblem use is offence | Strengthened emblem protection |
| Mohd. Ziyauddin v. Union of India | Commercial misuse of emblem illegal | Affirmed strict control over emblem usage |
Conclusion
The misuse of national symbols is taken seriously by Indian courts as it affects national pride and unity. The judiciary has balanced fundamental rights like freedom of speech with reasonable restrictions to protect the sanctity of national symbols. Intentional disrespect, defacement, or unauthorized use attracts strict penal consequences under relevant statutes.
The cases above illustrate that while citizens have the right to display and respect national symbols, this must be done within the boundaries of law and established codes of conduct.
RELATED Blog
0 comments