Playing national anthem in movie theatres not mandatory, says Supreme Court

Agencies
January 9, 2018

New Delhi, Jan 9: The Supreme Court today made the playing of the national anthem in cinema halls before a screening of movies optional, modifying its earlier order.

The apex court modified its November 30, 2016, order by which it had made the playing of the anthem mandatory in cinema halls before the screening of a film.

A bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra said a 12-member inter-ministerial committee, set up by the Centre, would take a final call on the playing of the national anthem in the cinemas.

The Centre's decision had come after the top court had in October last year observed that the people "cannot be forced to carry patriotism on their sleeves" and it cannot be assumed that if a person does not stand up for the national anthem, he or she is "less patriotic".

Observing that the society did not need "moral policing", the court had then said that next time, "the government will want people to stop wearing T-shirts and shorts to cinemas saying this would disrespect the national anthem."

The bench, also comprising Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud, said the committee should comprehensively look into all the aspects relating to the playing of national anthem and allowed the petitioners to make representations before the panel.

The bench, while disposing of the petitions pending before it, made it clear that the exemption granted earlier to disabled persons from standing in the cinema halls when the national anthem is being played, shall remain in force till the committee takes a decision.

The top court accepted the government's affidavit which said the 12-member panel has been set up to suggest changes in the 1971 Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act.

Attorney General K K Venugopal told the bench that the committee will submit its report within six months.

The Centre had yesterday told the apex court that an inter-ministerial committee has been set up as extensive consultations were needed for framing of guidelines describing the circumstances and occasions on which the national anthem is to be played or sung and observance of proper decorum on such occasions.

The government had said that the top court may "consider the restoration of status quo ante until then, that is the restoration of the position as it stood before the order passed by this court on November 30, 2016" as it mandated the playing of the anthem in cinemas before a feature film starts.

The inter-ministerial committee headed by Additional Secretary (Border Management), Ministry of Home Affairs, with representatives from various other ministries, including the Ministries of Defence, External Affairs, Culture, Woman and Child Development and Parliamentary Affairs.

It would also have representatives of the Ministries of Information and Broadcasting and Minority Affairs, Department of Legal Affairs, Department of School Education and Literacy and the Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disability, the affidavit filed by Centre said.

The apex court had on October 24 last year observed that people do not need to stand up in the cinema halls to prove their patriotism and had asked the Centre to consider amending the rules for regulating playing of the national anthem in the theatres.

"People go to cinema halls for undiluted entertainment.

Society needs entertainment. We cannot allow you (Centre) to shoot from our shoulders. People do not need to stand up in cinema halls to prove their patriotism," the bench had said.

"Desirability is one thing but making it mandatory is another. Citizens cannot be forced to carry patriotism on their sleeves and courts cannot inculcate patriotism among people through its order," it had said.

The court's strong remarks had come during the hearing on a PIL filed last year by Shyam Narayan Chouksey seeking a direction that the national anthem be played in all cinema halls before the start of the screening of a film.

The apex court had in its November 30, 2016, order said that "love and respect for the motherland is reflected when one shows respect to the national anthem as well as to the national flag".

It had also barred printing of the anthem or a part of it on any object and displaying it in such a manner at places which may be "disgraceful to its status and tantamount to disrespect".

Passing a slew of directions, the court had said that fundamental duties in the Constitution "do not allow any different notion or the perception of individual rights that have individual thought, have no space. The idea is constitutionally impermissible".

It had also said proper norms and protocol should be fixed regarding its playing and singing at official functions and programmes where those holding constitutional office are present.

All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) President Asaduddin Owaisi on Tuesday welcomed the Supreme Court’s decision.

“I totally welcome the order of the Supreme Court. Under the previous order, many people were harassed, especially people from the minority community, who were physically handicapped were targetted by all so-called vigilantes who support the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)," he said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
coastaldigest.com web desk
June 16,2020

New Delhi, Jun 16: Despite Prime Minister Narendra Modi led government’s attempt to downplay the border dispute with China, matters have heated up unprecedentedly along the Line of Actual Control (LAC)- the effective Sino-India border in Eastern Ladakh. 

The country has lost three precious lives – an army officer and two soldiers. The last time blood was spilled on the LAC, before the latest episode, was 45 years ago when the Chinese ambushed an Assam Rifles patrol in Tulung La.

India had lost four soldiers on October 20, 1975 in Tulung La, the last time bullets were fired on the India-China border though both the countries witnessed bitter stand-offs later at Sumdorong Chu valley in 1987, Depsang in 2013, Chumar in 2014 and Doklam in 2017.

Between 1962 and 1975, the biggest clash between India and China took place in Nathu La pass in 1967 when reports suggest that around 80 Indian soldiers were killed and many more Chinese personnel.

While three soldiers, including a Commanding Officer, were killed in the latest episode in Galwan Valley, the government describes it as a "violent clash" and does not mention opening fire.

New Delhi described the locality where the 1975 incident took place as "well within" its territory only to be rebuffed by Beijing as "sheer reversal of black and white and confusion of right and wrong".

The Ministry of External Affairs had then said that the Chinese had crossed the LAC and ambushed the soldiers while Beijing claimed the Indians entered their territory and did not return despite warnings.

The Indian government maintained that the ambush on the Assam Rifles' patrol in 1975 took place "500 metres south of Tulung" on the border between India and Tibet and "therefore in Indian territory". It said Chinese soldiers "penetrating" Indian territory implied a "change in China's position" on the border question but the Chinese denied this and blamed India for the incident.

The US diplomatic cables quoted an Indian military intelligence officer saying that the Chinese had erected stone walls on the Indian side of Tulung La and from these positions fired several hundred rounds at the Indian patrol.

"Four of the Indians had gone into a leading position while two (the ones who escaped) remained behind. The senior military intelligence officer emphasised that the soldiers on the Indian patrol were from the area and had patrolled that same region many times before," the cable said.

One of the US cables showed that former US Secretary of State and National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger sought details of the October 1975 clash "without approaching the host governments on actual location of October 20 incident". He also wanted to know what ground rules were followed regarding the proximity of LAC by border patrols.

A cable sent from the US mission in India on November 4, 1975 appeared to have doubts about the Chinese account saying it was "highly defensive".

"Given the unsettled situation on the sub-continent, particularly in Bangladesh, both Chinese and Indian authorities have authorised stepped up patrols along the disputed border. The clash may well have ensued when two such patrols unexpectedly encountered each other," it said.

Another cable from China on the same day quoted another October 1974 cable, which spoke about Chinese officials being concerned for long that "some hotheaded person on the PRC (People's Republic of China) might provoke an incident that could lead to renewed Sino-Indian hostilities. It went on to say that this clash suggested that "such concerns and apprehensions are not unwarranted".

According to the United States diplomatic cables, Chinese Foreign Ministry on November 3, 1975 disputed the statement of the MEA spokesperson, who said the incident took place inside Indian territory.

The Chinese had said "sheer reversal of black and white and confusion of right and wrong". In its version of the 1975 incident, they said Indian troops crossed the LAC at 1:30 PM at Tulung Pass on the Eastern Sector and "intruded" into their territory when personnel at the Civilian Checkpost at Chuna in Tibet warned them to withdraw.

Ignoring this, they claimed, Indian soldiers made "continual provocation and even opened fire at the Chinese civilian checkpost personnel, posing a grave threat to the life of the latter. The Chinese civilian checkpost personnel were obliged to fire back in self defence."

The Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson had also said they told the Indian side that they could collect the bodies "anytime" and on October 28, collected the bodies, weapons and ammunition and "signed a receipt".

The US cables from the then USSR suggested that the official media carried reports from Delhi on the October 1975 incident and they cited only Indian accounts of the incident "ridiculing alleged Chinese claims that the Indians crossed the line and opened fire first".

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
July 18,2020

Washington, Jul 18: The government of India has agreed to allow US air carriers to resume passenger services in the US-India market starting July 23, the US Transportation Department said on Friday.

The Indian government, citing the coronavirus, had banned all scheduled services, prompting the US Transportation Department in June to accuse India of engaging in "unfair and discriminatory practices" on charter air carriers serving India.

The Transportation Department said it was withdrawing an order it had issued requiring Indian air carriers to apply for authorization prior to conducting charter flights, and said it had approved an Air India application for passenger charter flights between the United States and India.

A group representing major US airlines and the Indian Embassy in Washington did not immediately comment on Friday.

India's Ministry of Civil Aviation said on Twitter it was moving to "further expand our international civil aviation operations" and arrangements from some flights "with US, UAE, France & Germany are being put in place while similar arrangements are also being worked out with several other countries."

"Under this arrangement," it added, "airlines from the concerned countries will be able to operate flights from & to India along with Indian carriers."

The US Transportation Department order was set to take effect next week. The Trump administration said in June it wanted "to restore a level playing field for US airlines" under the US-India Air Transport Agreement. The Indian government had banned all scheduled services and failed to approve US carriers for charter operations, it added.

The US government said in June that Air India had been operating "repatriation" charter flights between India and the United States in both directions since May 7.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
August 6,2020

Thiruvananthapuram, Aug 6 : Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan has said that Congress is known for adopting a soft Hindutva agenda and that there was nothing new in the remarks of Priyanka Gandhi Vadra and Rahul Gandhi on Ayodhya temple construction.

"I am not surprised regarding, Priyanka Gandhi's remark on Ayodhya. From Rajiv Gandhi and Narasimha Rao, Congress had followed a similar stance. I don't think Congress has any stand when it comes to secularism. 

If it was the case, then our country would not have reached such a level," the chief minister said when asked about the 'Bhumi Pujan' ceremony at the Ram temple in Ayodhya on Wednesday.

"There is nothing new on Rahul Gandhi or Priyanka Gandhi's position on the issue. They are following the Congress' soft Hindutva agenda. There is no element of surprise," Vijayan said.

Further, Vijayan said that CPI(M) Politburo had made clear the party's viewpoint on the Ayodhya temple construction.

"When it comes to Ayodhya issue. I want to ask who had allowed worship there. It was Congress. Who had allowed to lay the idol there? It was Congress. 

Who gave permission to Karseva? It was Congress. Even when it came to demolition of Babri Masjid too who shut their eyes and gave a silent nod for it- wasn't it the Congress regime at the centre? And Muslim League (IUML) was part of it. These are all part of our history," said Kerala Chief Minister.

He said instead of involving in discussions on it, more time should be utilised towards containing the COVID-19 spread in the country and helping the poor who are suffering due to the pandemic.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.