Story perspectives

Supreme Court Questions 2026 Anthem Criminal Penalties

By Drooid · Sep 23, 2026, 4:09 AM UTC · How we work

Summary

Story summary

The Supreme Court heard T M Krishna’s petition challenging the 2026 amendment criminalising non-singing of Vande Mataram.
Chief Justice Surya Kant’s bench applied the 1986 Bijoe Emmanuel decision protecting conscientious objectors.
Justice Joymalya Bagchi noted the amendment adds penalties for preventing the anthem or national song without defining the song.
The bench asked the Centre whether refusing to sing Vande Mataram could attract criminal liability.

History

Historical Context

In 1943 the United States Supreme Court, overturning its 1940 Gobitis ruling, held in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette that compulsory flag salutes violate the First Amendment. The 6-3 decision protected roughly 2,000 West Virginia students, many Jehovah’s Witnesses, and set a precedent later cited to safeguard individual conscience against state-mandated patriotism.

1 of 2

Story summary

The Supreme Court heard T M Krishna’s petition challenging the 2026 amendment criminalising non-singing of Vande Mataram.
Chief Justice Surya Kant’s bench applied the 1986 Bijoe Emmanuel decision protecting conscientious objectors.
Justice Joymalya Bagchi noted the amendment adds penalties for preventing the anthem or national song without defining the song.
The bench asked the Centre whether refusing to sing Vande Mataram could attract criminal liability.

1 / 2