Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala
In one line: In this 1986 case the Supreme Court held that students could not be expelled for not singing the National Anthem when they stood up respectfully.
The facts
Three children belonging to the Jehovah's Witnesses faith stood during the Anthem at their Kerala school but did not sing, because their faith forbade it. They were expelled.
What the Court held
The Court held that their expulsion violated Article 19(1)(a), which includes the freedom to remain silent, and Article 25, freedom of conscience. Standing respectfully showed no disrespect, and no law required anyone to sing. It said that 'our tradition teaches tolerance'.
Why in news
Petitioners against the six-stanza orders rely on it to argue that not singing Vande Mataram cannot be treated as disrespect.
Where to go next
- Freedom of conscience under Article 25
- National symbols and their legal status
Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala in the news
- Supreme Court issues notice on pleas against the six-stanza Vande Mataram orders 28 October 2026
The precedent on respectful silence.
- Supreme Court: refusing to sing the National Song cannot be punished 23 September 2026
The right to remain silent
Previous-year questions on this
- 2025 · GS2 · 15 marks "Constitutional morality is the fulcrum which acts as an essential check upon the high functionaries and citizens alike..." In view of the above observation of the Supreme Court, explain the concept…
- 2021 · GS2 · 10 marks 'Constitutional Morality' is rooted in the constitution itself and is founded on its essential facets. Explain the doctrine of 'Constitutional Morality' with the help of relevant judicial decisions.
- 2014 · GS2 · 12.5 marks What do you understand by the concept "freedom of speech and expression"? Does it cover hate speech also? Why do the films in India stand on a slightly different plane from other forms of…
- 2013 · GS2 · 10 marks Discuss Section 66A of IT Act, with reference to its alleged violation of Article 19 of the Constitution.