Supreme Court says state can set National Song, but cannot impose conscientious objectors to penal action

The Supreme Court on Tuesday (September 22, 2026) observed that while a democratically elected government may give shape to the scope and length of the National Song, it cannot violate individual and collective religious freedoms or subject conscientious objectors, who refuse to sing one or all the stanzas of the ‘Vande Mataram’, to penal consequences.

“What is the National Song is not in dispute… It is for the democratically-elected state to decide and give aspiration as to what the National Song is, whether it should be two stanzas or four stanzas. But nobody can infract Article 25 and 26 [religious freedom] or subject a conscientious objector to penal consequences… It is for the conscientious objector to recite one or all stanzas of the National Song without subjecting himself to criminal prosecution,” Justice Joymalya Bagchi, part of a three-judge Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, observed.

Justice Bagchi said the 1986 Supreme Court precedent in the Bijoe Emmanuel versus State of Kerala upholding the right to religious freedom, constitutional tolerance and silent objection still holds true.

Also Read: Plea in SC terms six-stanza Vande Mataram a ‘divisive religious war song’, a step towards ‘theocracy’

The court sought a response from the Union government on a petition filed by renowned Carnatic vocalist and author T.M. Krishna challenging the Prevention of Insults to National Honour (Amendment) Act, 2026 read with the administrative directions issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs in January and a subsequent circular in July.

Mr. Krishna, represented by senior advocate S. Muralidhar and advocate Prasanna S., said the amended law and Executive orders compel the playing and mass singing of the entire six stanzas of Vande Mataram ahead of the National Anthem at public functions. Non-compliance would risk three years’ imprisonment or fine or both.