Shyam Narayan Chouksey v Union of India (AIR 2018 SC 357)

The landmark case of Shyam Narayan Chouksey v Union of India revolved around respect for the National Anthem and its appropriate usage. It addressed critical questions about patriotism, fundamental rights, and inclusivity, particularly in the context of cinema halls. The case highlighted the intersection between the enforcement of national symbols and the protection of individual rights under the Constitution of India.

Case Details

• Citation: AIR 2018 SC 357
• Date of Judgement: January 9, 2018
• Court: Supreme Court of India
• Bench: Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justice A.M. Khanwilkar, and Justice Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud

Facts of Shyam Narayan Chouksey v Union of India

1. Background: Shyam Narayan Chouksey, a retired engineer, filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) under Article 32 of the Constitution. His concerns stemmed from an incident in 2000 when, during the screening of the film Kabhi Khushi Kabhi Gham, a scene featuring the National Anthem was met with disrespect in a cinema hall. Chouksey stood in respect of the anthem, only to be rebuked by other viewers for obstructing their view.
2. Initial Action: Chouksey approached the Madhya Pradesh High Court, which temporarily halted the screening of the film. Dissatisfied with the limited scope of the decision, he moved to the Supreme Court, seeking nationwide directions to safeguard the sanctity of the National Anthem and prevent its misuse.
3. Relief Sought: 
   • Mandatory protocols for playing the National Anthem.
   • Prohibition of commercial exploitation, dramatisation, and other inappropriate uses of the anthem.
4. Interim Order (30.11.2016): The Supreme Court issued a directive making it mandatory for cinema halls to play the National Anthem before films, requiring all attendees to stand in respect. This order also prohibited commercial exploitation of the anthem and dramatisation.

Issues Raised

The issues raised in Shyam Narayan Chouksey v Union of India were:

• What constitutes disrespect or abuse of the National Anthem?
• Is standing mandatory for all individuals during the National Anthem?
• Should individuals with disabilities be exempt from standing?
• Can the National Anthem be played in cinemas without disrespect?

Relevant Provisions

Constitution of India, 1949

• Article 32: Right to move the Supreme Court for the enforcement of fundamental rights.
• Article 51-A(a): Fundamental duty to respect the Constitution, National Flag, and National Anthem.

Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971

• Section 2: Penalises acts of disrespect toward the National Flag and Constitution.
• Section 3: Penalises disturbances during the singing of the National Anthem, punishable by up to three years’ imprisonment or fine, or both.

Arguments by the Petitioner

• Commercial Exploitation and Disrespect: Highlighted instances of the National Anthem being used in a variety of shows and interviews to assess behavioural patterns. Suggested that dramatisation and inappropriate usage in films amounted to disrespect. 
• Mandatory Respect: Proposed mandatory protocols for playing the anthem before films. Advocated strict enforcement of respect, including standing during the anthem.
• Guidelines for Proper Use: The National Anthem should not be played in inappropriate settings or before individuals unaware of its significance. Prohibited its use on undesirable objects or in situations where its dignity could be compromised.

Arguments by the Respondents

• Respect for National Symbols: Agreed that the National Anthem should be respected, emphasising its role in fostering patriotism and national unity.
• Optional Playing of the Anthem: Argued against mandatory playing of the anthem in cinemas, suggesting it should be left to discretion. Pointed out the diversity of India and the need to balance enforcement with inclusivity.
• Exemptions for Disabled Individuals: Referred to the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights, and Full Participation) Act, 1995. Stressed that disabled individuals unable to stand should be exempted and allowed to show respect in other ways.
• Situational Respect: Suggested that standing during the anthem may not be necessary when it is part of a film’s storyline or a documentary.

Shyam Narayan Chouksey v Union of India Judgement

Interim Orders (30.11.2016)

• Cinema halls were directed to play the National Anthem before every film screening.
• Standing was made mandatory to show respect.
• Commercial exploitation and dramatisation of the anthem were prohibited.
• Directed that cinema hall doors remain closed during the anthem to prevent disturbances, though not locked to ensure safety (in reference to MCD v. Uphaar Tragedy Victims Association).

Final Ruling

The Court in Shyam Narayan Chouksey v Union of India modified its interim orders after considering submissions from various stakeholders:

• Playing the National Anthem in cinema halls was made optional, with the final decision left to the executive, based on recommendations from a committee.
• Citizens must respect the National Anthem whenever it is played or sung, but the enforcement of such respect depends on the context.

Exemptions for Disabled Individuals

• Individuals with disabilities, including wheelchair users and those with autism, cerebral palsy, or multiple sclerosis, were exempt from standing.
• Such individuals were required to display respect in a manner appropriate to their abilities.

Key Observations by the Court in Shyam Narayan Chouksey versus Union of India

• Respect and Patriotism: The National Anthem, National Flag, and National Song are secular symbols of national unity and patriotism. Respect for these symbols is an essential expression of national loyalty.
• Legal Precedents: Referred to Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala (1986), where compelling individuals to act against their religious beliefs (e.g., standing during the anthem) was held unconstitutional under Articles 19(1)(a) and 25. Highlighted the principle that respect can be demonstrated in various ways depending on circumstances.
• Role of the Executive: Prescriptions for where and when the anthem should be played were left to the executive’s discretion.
• National Symbols and Sovereignty: The Court emphasised that national symbols represent collective commitment and patriotism, necessary for integrating India’s diverse communities.

Conclusion

The case of Shyam Narayan Chouksey v Union of India serves as a significant precedent in balancing respect for national symbols with individual rights and practical realities. It underscores the importance of patriotism while ensuring that its enforcement aligns with constitutional values and the diversity of Indian society. By making the playing of the National Anthem optional and leaving enforcement to the executive, the judgment reflects a progressive and nuanced approach to this sensitive issue.