Supreme Court Petition Challenges Mandatory Six-Stanza Version of “Vande Mataram”

On October 1 2026, Buddhist activist B.D. Borkar filed a petition under Article 32 in the Supreme Court seeking to overturn two Ministry of Home Affairs circulars (January 28 2026 and July 9 2026) and the 2026 amendment to the *Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act* (effective August 6 2026). Borkar argues that the orders compel singing the six-stanza version of “Vande Mataram” – a text from Bankim Chandra Chatterjee’s *Anandamath* – and that this amounts to forced religious worship, violating fundamental rights and the secular character of the Republic. He asks the Court to recognize the original two-stanza composition as the National Song and to prohibit any compulsory performance of the six-stanza version.

The Hindu

“Vande Mataram” was composed in the early 1870s as a two-stanza tribute to India’s landscape. Chatterjee’s 1881 novel *Anandamath* added four stanzas invoking Hindu deities and framing the song as a prayer for victory against Muslims. From Independence until 2026, the two-stanza version was routinely sung at official functions, schools and public gatherings. The Congress Working Committee recommended that only the first two stanzas be performed at national gatherings, and during the Constituent Assembly on January 24 1950, Rajendra Prasad affirmed that “Vande Mataram” would be honoured alongside the national anthem, without specifying the six-stanza text.

Buddhist activist moves Supreme Court against six-stanza Vande Mataram mandate, says Anandamath version’s 'Islamophobic' content threatens fraternity, secularism

During the Sept 22 2026 hearing, the bench reiterated that while the government may decide the length of the National Song, it cannot force individuals to participate in any stanza against their conscience. Justice Joymalya Bagchi emphasized that the *Bijoe Emmanuel* precedent should guide interpretation of the amendment. The Court ordered that a paper copy of the petition be provided to Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who may file a response by Oct 12 2026. No final ruling on the constitutional validity of the MHA orders or the amendment has been rendered.

Buddhist activist moves Supreme Court against six-stanza Vande Mataram mandate, says Anandamath version’s 'Islamophobic' content threatens fraternity, secularism

• The amendment does not define “National Song” or specify which version of “Vande Mataram” it protects, creating legal ambiguity.

Buddhist activist moves Supreme Court against six-stanza Vande Mataram mandate, says Anandamath version’s 'Islamophobic' content threatens fraternity, secularism

• The Supreme Court’s observations are limited to procedural guidance; a substantive judgment on the constitutionality of the orders is still pending.

Buddhist activist moves Supreme Court against six-stanza Vande Mataram mandate, says Anandamath version’s 'Islamophobic' content threatens fraternity, secularism

A hearing is scheduled for Oct 12 2026, when the government is expected to submit its response. The outcome will determine whether the six-stanza version can be mandated at state-run events and whether criminal penalties may be imposed for non-compliance, shaping the balance between state-prescribed cultural symbols and individual religious freedoms in India.

Buddhist activist moves Supreme Court against six-stanza Vande Mataram mandate, says Anandamath version’s 'Islamophobic' content threatens fraternity, secularism