Holding

The National Anthem cannot be altered; the petition seeking deletion of the word ‘Sindh’ is dismissed.

Summary

Sanjeev Bhatnagar, an advocate, filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking a direction to the Union of India to delete the word “Sindh” from the National Anthem, arguing that Sindh is no longer part of India after Partition. The petition, previously dismissed, was re‑filed and opposed by several Sindhi organisations and the Union of India. The Court held that the National Anthem is a hymn expressing patriotic sentiment, not a territorial chronicle, and that “Sindh” also denotes a river, a culture and a people spread across India. No constitutional right or fundamental duty was infringed, and the petition was not in the public interest. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition with costs, affirming that the Anthem cannot be altered.

Issues considered

Whether the text of the National Anthem can be rectified to delete the word ‘Sindh’.
Whether a petition under Article 32 seeking such alteration is maintainable as a public‑interest litigation.
Whether the inclusion of ‘Sindh’ violates any constitutional provision or fundamental right.

Legislation cited

Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971

Subjects

National AnthemArticle 32Public Interest LitigationConstitution of IndiaFundamental DutyPrevention of Insults to National Honour ActRabindranath TagoreSindhCultural heritage

Judgment

,,
SANJEEV BHATNAGAR A
v.
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

MAY 13, 2005

[R.C. LAHOTI, CJ. AND P.K. BALASUBRAMANYAN, J.] B

I
Constitution of India 1950-Artic/e 32-Public Interest Litigation-
Seeking deletion of word 'Sindh' from the Natiokal Anthem as 'Sindh' no
I
longer part of India post partition-Held: NationaltAnthem is song expressing
patriotic feelings and not a chronicle defining te;riiory of nation which has C
adopted the anthem- 'Sindh' is not just a geogrJphical region, it refers to
place and to its people spread throughout the country-Further, issue raised
neither constitutional nor there is enforcement ofahy fundamental right-A/so
j
'
petition not in public interest-Hence, petition rejected-Article
,!
5/A.

The question which arose for consideration in this writ petition was D
whether the text of National Anthem could be rectified and the word
'Sindh' be deleted therefrom since the geographical region 'Sindh' does
not form part of India post partition. ;
I I
Dismissing the Writ Petition, the Court••.
I
E
HELD: 1.1. A National Anthem is a hymn or song expressing
1
patriotic sentiments or feelings. It is not a ch ronicle which defines the
territory of the nation which has adopted the· anthem. A few things such
as - a National Flag, a National Song, a Natio~al Emblem and so on, are
symbolic of our national honour and heritage.. The National Anthem did
not, and do~s not, enlist the states or regional areas which were part of F
India at the point of time when it was written\ nor is it necessary that the
structure of the National Anthem should go o'ii changing as and when the
territories or the internal distribution of geographical regions and
provinces undergoes changes. Recently Uttaranchal, Chhattisgarh and
Jharkhand have been carved out by reorganizing certain states but that G
does not mean that the National Anthem should be enlarged, re-written
or modified to include the names of these new states. (377-C-D, D-E, E-F)
1.2. The National· Anthem is our patriotic salutation to our
motherland, nestling between the Himalyas and the oceans and the seas
371 H
372 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2005] SUPP. I S.C.R.

A surrounding her. The mention of a few names therein is symbolic of our
recollection of the glorious heritage of India. 'Sindh' is not just a
geographical region. It refers to the place and to its people. Sindhis are
spread throughout the country and they derive their such name as having
originated and migrated from Sindh. 'Sindh' also refers to the river
'Sindhu 'or 'Indus'. It also refers to a culture, one of the oldest in the world
B and even modern India feels proud of its having inherited the Indus Valley
Civilisation as an inalienable part of its heritage. River Indus (Sindhu) finds
numerous references in the Indian Classical Literature including Rig Veda.
[377-E-F-G)

C 1.3. The National Anthem is the poem written by Rabindranath
Tagore. He himself had said that the five stanzas in which the poem was
written is addressed to c'od. The poem is a reflection of the real India as
a country - a confluence of many religions, rates, communities and
geographical entities. It is a message of unity in diVersity. It is a patriotic

D
..
song. It has since the jldecades inspired niany by arousing their patriotic
'
sentiments when sung).IJ. ~~ythm. It is. the,repres~ntativ~ of the ethos of
the country. Any classic, o·nce.created, becomes immortal and inalienable;
even its creator may not fed:l!ke making any change in it~ A~y t~mperi~g
with the script of the poem would be showing.disrespect to the great poet-
Rabindranath Tagore. [377-G-H; 378-A-B) . ' . ..
I , ' .
E . 1.4. The iss~e raised does not amount to raising ar_iy constitutional
issue o,r ca,nvassing a~y"fundarriental.right for, the enforcement of which
. ' , ~' • •~ "Ii',:-- • ~ I ,.f !
the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution can be
• ~' ,,-· ' ..-;., F .' ' I

invoked. The petition
. is. ·not
-... in.. public
- -·
interest -,,
but ,. more of
. the publicity
interest litigation. It is a"petition which should never have been filed.
• • • I'.. '· f · '
.~ _.,,.; . . [378-B-C; 380-D-E)
F
'Indian National AYfthem' by Prab'odhchandrci Sen Vishvi:I Bharti,
Calcutta May 1945, refer~ed fo. · 1
·
1 ··l :. . ' •.
' i.
2. The Preventipn.{1f Insults to National· Honour Act, 1971 enacted
G by the Parliament makes it an offence for whoever intentionally prevents
the singing'of the Indian, National-Anthem ·or· causes:disturbance to any
assembly engaged in sue~ singing.-Article SlA of the Constitution inserted
by Forty-second Amendrttent, provid~s for it being the fundam~ntal duty,
1
amongst others, of ever/citizen of India to abide by the Constitution and
.~ • • J • ; -
respect its ideals and i1fstitutions, the National Flag and tlie National
H Anthem. The Constitutio~ of India, its ideals and institutions, the National
SANJEEV BHATNAGAR v. U.O.I. [LAHOTI, CJ.] 373

. Flag and the National Anthem have been treated almost on par. From the ·A_
language of clause (a) of Article SIA, it is clear that the National Anthem
is an ideal and an institution for the Indian citizens. [375-F-G-H)
,.
Re: Kera/a Education Bill, (1959] SCR 995, referred to .
..
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition (C) No. 16 of2005. B
(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.)

P_etitioner-in-person.
~

Milon K. Banerji, Attorney General for India, A. Sharan, Additional
Solicitor General, M.R. Calla, Ram Jethmalani; Amit Anand Tiwari, Samir
c
Ali Khan, Amit Kumar, Navin Prakash, Gaurav Aggarwal, Dewashish Bharuka,
Mrs . Sushma Suri, Ms. Ranjeeta Rohatgi.' Ms. Lata Krishnamurthy, R.L.
Panjwani, Ms. P.R. Mala, Mushtaq Ahmad, Vijay Panjwani, Dr. Natis A.
Siddiqui, R.N. Keshwani and Ms. Priya Hingorani with them for the apP,earing
parties. D
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

R.C. LAHOTI, CJ. On 24th January 1950, the Constituent Assembly
of India finally met to sign the Constitution. The question of having a National
Anthem for India as a free country and a nation was under consideration. The E
Constituent Assembly had appointed a Committee to make recommendations
about the final selection of a National Anthem.

- After deliberations it was considered desirable to leave it with the
President to make a declaration in the Assembly on the question of adopting
a National Anthem for India. In the Constitution Hall, on 24th January 1950, F
where the Constituent Assembly of India finally met to sign the Constitution,
President Dr. Rajendra Prasad declared his decision on the matter relating to
National Anthem in his opening statement in the following words:-

"There is one matter which has been pending for discussion,
namely the question of the National Anthem. At one time it was
G
thought that the matter might be brought up before the House and a
decision taken by the House by way of a resolution. But it has been
felt that, instead of taking a formal decision by means of a resolution, 'J'",.

it was better ifl make a statement with regard to the National Anthem.
'· H
374 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2005) SUPP. I S.C.R.

A Accordingly I make this statement.

The composition consisting of the words and music known as
Jana Gana Mana is the National Anthem of India, subject to such
alterations in the words as the Government may authorise as occasion
arises; and the song Vande,., Mataram, which has played a historic part
B in the struggle for Indian freedom, shall be honoured equally with
Jana Gana Mana and shall have equal status with it. I hope this will
satisfy the Members.''

-Constituent Assembly Debates, XII.
(24th January, 1950)
c After the Constitution had been signed by all the members of the
Assembly, the President; on the request ofShri M. Ananthasayanam Ayyangar
permitted all members of the House to sing Jana Gana Mana in chorus. Then
led by Shrimati Pumima Banerji all of them sang it in chorus for the first
time after its formal adoption as our National Anthem.
D
The following is the transliteration i.e. the text of the National Anthem
in Hindi: l
"Jana-gana-mana-adhinayaka, jaya he
Bharata-bhagya-vidhata.
E
PJnjab-Sindh-Gujarat-Maratha
Dravida-Utkala-Banga
Vindhya-Himachala-Yamuna-Ganga
Uchchala-Jaladhi-taranga.
F
Tova shubha name jage,
; Tova shubha asisa mange,
Gahe lava jaya gatha,
Jana-gana-mangala-dayaka jaya he
G
. Bharata-bhagya-vidhata.
Jaya he,jaya he,jaya he
Jaya jaya jaya, jaya he!"

H (Source-India 2004, A Reference Annual, published by Publications Division,
SANJEEV BHATNAGAR v. U.0.1. [LAHOTI, CJ.] 375

Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India, p.22) A
The great poet Rabindranath Tagore had himself rendered the English
translation of his poem which reads as under:-

"Thou art the ruler of the minds of all people, dispenser of India's
~~~- B
Thy name rouses the hearts of Punjab, Sind, Gujarat and Maratha,

Of the Dravida and Orissa and Bengal;

It echoes in the hills of the Vindhyas and Himalayas, mingles in the
music of Jamuna and Ganges and is chanted by the waves of the C
Indian Sea.

They pray for thy blessings and sing thy praise.

The saving of all people waits in thy hand, thou dispenser of India's
destiny. D
Victory, victory, victory to thee."

(Source, India 2004, ibid, p.22)

The song was first sung on December 27, 1911 at the Calcutta session
of the Indian National Congress. Ever since the date of its being adopted by E
the Constituent Assembly of India, the National Anthem has been sung
throughout the length and breadth of India, by every patriot, every citizen
and all people of this country. It has been sung even in places beyond India.

The Prevention oflnsults to National Honour Act, 1971 (Act No. 69 of F
1971) enacted by the Parliament makes it an offence for whoever intentionally
prevents the singing of the Indian National Anthem or causes disturbance to
any assembly engaged in such singing. Article 51 A of the Constitution of
India, inserted by Forty-second Amendment, provides for it being the
fundamental duty, amongst others, of every citizen of India to abide by the
Constitution and respect its ideals and institutions, the National Flag and the G
National Anthem. The Constitution of India, its ideals and institutions, the
National Flag and the National Anthem have been treated almost on par.
From the language of Clause (a) of Article 5 lA, it is clear that the National
-Anthem is an ideal and an institution for the Indian citizens. In Re: Kera/a
Education Bill, (1959] SCR 99~.• S.R. Das, Chief Justice, quoted a stanza H
from the National Anthem as India sending out its message of goodwill to the
376 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2005] SUPP. 1 S.C.R.

A world and thus the genius of India finding unity in diversity by assimilating
the best of all creeds and cultures.

The petitioner is an advocate. He has filed this petition, claiming to be
in. public interest, invoking the extradrdinary jurisdiction of this Court under
Article 32 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the Union of
B India to rectify the text of National Anthem and delete the word 'Sindh'
therefrom. Earlier too, he had filed a similar petition, registered as W.P.(C)
No.506/2004. When the matter came up for hearing on 20.9.2004, the Court
was not inclined to entertain the petition. However, the petitioner insisted
that the Government of India had the authority to alter the text of National
C Anthem and therefore, a direction by the Court in that regard was called for.
The petition was dismissed though the petitioner was allowed liberty of inviting
the attention of the Central Government to the facts stated in the writ petition
and such other material as may be with the petitioner. The petitioner did
make a representation on 24.9.2004. On 3.12.2004, he once again filed this
writ petition seeking the very same and the only relief as was sought for
D earlier. The Court directed a notice to be issued to the respondent-Union of
India for having its response.

While the Union of India has filed its response opposing the prayer
made by the petitioner, there are a number of applicants seeking intervention
E in the hearing so as to oppose the writ petition. Some of the intervenors are
All India Sindhu Culture Society headed by a former Judge of the High
Court, Rashtriya Sindhu Parishad headed by an Advocate, Sindhi Council of
India A Registere9 Society, International Sindhi Forum; Sindhi Jagriti Sabha,
Delhi Pradesh Sindhi Samaj and a few other similar institutions and
representative bodies. A few individu.als belonging to Sindhi or non-Sindhi
F community have also sought for intervention. In suq~tance, all the.intervenors
have offered their ve~ement opposition to the petition submitting that their
feelings, first as an Indian and then as members of Sindhi community who
love Sindhi as a language and also as a culture, ha~e been hurt by the move
of the petitioner. They have sought for the petition being dismissed.

G The stand taken by the Union of India is that the National Anthem is
a highly emotive issue; any alteration/substitution in the National Arith.em
will distort the National Anthem and may give rise to several unnecessary
controversies, while no· fruitful object will be served. The National Anthem
is not open to mutilation. The song is a literary creation which cannot be
H changed. The National Anthem reflects our culture spread throughout the
SANJEEV BHATNAGAR v. U.0.1. [LAHOTI, CJ.] 377

length and breadth of India whether it is North, South, East or West. A
Having heard the petitioner appearing in-person, the learned Attorney
General for the Union of India and the several counsel for intervenors led by
Mr. Ram Jethmalani, Senior Advocate, and a few intervenors appearing in-
person, we are satisfied that the petition is wholly devoid of any merit and
is liable to be dismissed. The main plank of the petitioner's case is that the B
geographical region known as 'Sindh', was a part of India pre-partition (i.e.
before 15th August, 194 7) and ever since then it is not a part of India, and
. therefore, the use of the word 'Sindh' in the National Anthem is misplaced
and deserves to be deleted for which an appropriate direction needs to be
issued to the Union of India. In our opinion, the submission is misconceived C
for very many reasons which we proceed to summarize herein below.

A National Anthem is a hymn or song expressing patriotic sentiments
or feelings. It is not a chronicle which defines the territory of the nation
which has adopted the anthem. A few things such as-a National Flag, a
National Song, a National Emblem and so on, are symbolic of our national D
honour and heritage. The National Anthem did not, and does not, enlist the
states or regional areas which were part of India at the point of time when
it was written. Nor is it necessary that the structure of the National Anthem
should go on changing as and when the territories or the internal distribution
of geographical regions and provinces undergoes changes. Very recently
Uttaranchal, Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand have been carved out by reorganizing E
certain states. Does it mean that the National Anthem should be enlarged, re-
written or modified to include the names of these new states? The obvious
answer is - no. The National Anthem is our patriotic salutation to our
motherland, nestling between the Himalyas and the oceans and the seas
surrounding her. The mention of a few names therein is symbolic of our F
recollection of the gloriousheritage oflndia. 'Sindh' is not just a geographical
region. It refers to the p_lace and to its people, Sindhis are spread throughout
the country and they derive their such name as having originated and migrated
from Sindh. 'Sindh' also refers to the river 'Sindhu' or 'Indus'. It also refers
to a culture, one of the oldest in the world and even modern India feels proud
of its having inherited the Indus Valley Civilisation as an inalienable part of G
· its heritage. River Indus (Sindhu) finds numerous references in the Indian
Classical Literature including Rig Veda.

The National Anthem is the poem as it was written by Rabindranath
Tagore. He himself had said that the five stanzas in which the poem was H
378 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2005] SUPP. I S.C.R.

A written is addressed to God. The poem is a reflection of the real India as a
country-a confluence of many religions, races, communities and geographical
entities. It is a message of unity in diversity. It is a patriotic song. It has since
the decades inspired many by arousing their patriotic sentiments when sung
in rhythm. It is the representative of the ethos of the country. Any classic,
once created, becomes immortal and inalienable; even its creator may not
B feel like making any change in it. Any tampering with the script of the poem
would be showing disrespect to the great poet-Rabindranath Tagore.

The hue and cry raised by the petitioner in his petition and also during
the hearing at the Bar does not amount to raising any constitutional issue or
C canvassing any fundamental right for the enforcement of which the jurisdiction
of this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution can be invoked. The issue
is puerile. Shri Milon Banerjee, the learned Attorney General for India,
submitted that the Union of India, a democratically elected popular
Government is not in favour of making any alteration in or any tampering
with a finely structured poem or song, which is the National Anthem. Every
D word placed therein is carefully in position in the whole composition. A
suggestion seeking a substitution of words in the National Anthem would be
"a bid to rob Tagore of his greatness". He further submitted that in any
poetry the structure has some purpose other than to clarify the content. Poetry
is more structured than prose. It is the structure which forces the author to
E be more creative; to find ways of saying things which do not disrupt the flow.
The choice of words and the structure often provide a path for the reader to
follow outside the flow of the theme and a good poet achieves interesting
things by playing the flow through the content and off the content. The fabric
of words is the creation of the author. A poem once popular, more so if
adopted as a National Anthem, becomes symbolic of the feelings, ideas and
F images that have come to be associated in our minds with the words used by
the author in structuring the poem and then the meaning of a word or a group
of words reaches far beyond its dictionary definition. The learned Attorney
General invited our attention to the book. "India's National Anthem" by
Prabodhchandra Sen, published by Vishva Bharti, Calcutta in May 1949,
G wherein Mahatma Gandhi, the Father of the Nation, has been quoted as
having said in a prayer discourse on 8th May, 1946 on the occasion of
Rabindranath Tagore's Birth Anniversary about Jana Gana Mana-"lt is not
only a song but is also like a devotional hymn". The National Anthem has
been given a tune. Its singing or playing takes 52 seconds.

H The learned Attorney General read out the following passage from
SANJEEV BHATNAGAR v. U.0.1. [LAHOTI, CJ.) 379

. "India's National Anthem" (ibid) which we feel i_nclined to quote verbatim A
for its value:

"THE MORNING SONG OF INDIA"

In the year 1919, during his tour of South India, Rabindranath
spent five days at the Theosophical College; Madanapalle, at the B
'
invitation of Principal James H. Cousins. There-ire ·sang the song
'Janaganamana' at some function. The audience was very much moved
by the tune and at their request he made an English translation of the
song and called it 'The Morning Song of India'. The college
authorities, greatly impressed by the tune and the lofty ideals of the
song, selected it as their prayer song to be sung every morning before C
the day's work commenced. In a letter (23.7.34) Principal Cousins
writes:

Every working morning Janaganamana is sung by hundreds of
young people in our big hall. We want to extend its purifying influence D/
by sending copies of it to other schools and colleges in India and by
making it known abroad.

Later, in the year 1936, the translation mentioned above was
printed in the Poet's own handwriting in the College Commemoration
Volume and distributed widely, with a note that this 'would become
one of .the world's most precious documents ..... From Madanapalle E
Janagana has spread all over India, and is admired in Europe and
America.'

In the next year ( 193 7), when a bitter controversy was raging
throughout the whole country over the selection of India's National F
Anthem, Principal Cousins issued a statement to the Press (3.11.37)
in which he stated:

My suggestion is that Dr. Rabindranath's own intensely patriotic,
ideally stimulating, and at the same time world-embracing Morning
Song of India (Janaganamana) should be confirmed officially, as what G
it has for almost twenty years been unofficially, namely, the true
National Anthem of India."

Mr. Ram Jethmalani, the learned senior counsel leading the intervenors,
severely criticized the conduct of the petitioner who has mentioned in th~
writ petition that the continued use of the word 'Sindh' in the National H
380 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2005] SUPP. I S.C.R.

A Anthem offends patriotic sentiments of the citizens of India and is offensive
of sovereignty of the neighbouring country. He goes on to allege that the
sentiments of 100 crore Indians can be soothened by correcting and updating
the "National Anthem". The learned senior counsel posed the questions-
Whose cause the petitioner is pleadingof the citizens of India or of a
B neighbouring country? Wherefrom does the petitioner gather an impression
and plead that he is espousing the cause of more than one billion people of
India? The learned senior counsel was at pains to point out that ever since
this petition was filed in the Court and notice was dire~ted to be issued the
Indian newspapers have been flooded with editorials and hundreds of 'letters
to the editor' highlighting the sentiments of the people of India, and in
C particular of Sindhis who have felt hurt by the move of the petitioner. There
are several oppositions filed in the Court. There is not even one who may
have spoken in support of the petitioner.

We find merit in the submissions made by the learned Attorney General
for India and Mr. Ram Jethmalani, the learned s~nior cdunsel appearing for
D the intervenors, and agree with the same.

We are satisfied that the petitioner is not entitled to the rdief prayed
for. The petition is wholly devoid of any merit. The petition is not in public
interest. It is a petition which should never have been filed. It is more of the
publicity interest litigation wherein the.petitioner seems to have achieved his
E purpose, To discourage the filing of such. like petitions which result only in
wasting the valuable time of this Court, we directthe petition to be dismissed
with costs quantified at Rs. I 0,000.

N.J. Writ Petition dismissed.