1986 (8) TMI 448 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Violation of Fundamental Rights u/Art. 19(1)(a) and Art. 25(1) of the Constitution.
2. Legality of expulsion based on non-participation in the National Anthem.
3. Interpretation of religious freedom and its limits under the Constitution.

Summary:

Violation of Fundamental Rights u/Art. 19(1)(a) and Art. 25(1):
The appellants, students and followers of Jehovah's Witnesses, were expelled for not singing the National Anthem, though they stood respectfully. The Supreme Court noted that the High Court misdirected itself by focusing on the content of the Anthem rather than the appellants' religious beliefs. The Court recognized that Jehovah's Witnesses hold sincere religious beliefs that prohibit them from participating in certain rituals, including singing national anthems. The Court cited various international cases and encyclopedic references to establish the global recognition of these beliefs.

Legality of Expulsion:
The Court examined whether the expulsion violated the appellants' rights under Art. 19(1)(a) and Art. 25(1). It found no law obliging anyone to sing the National Anthem and stated that standing respectfully without singing does not constitute disrespect. The Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971, and the Kerala Education Act were reviewed, and it was determined that the expulsion was not justified under these laws. The circulars relied upon by the Kerala Education Authorities lacked statutory basis and could not override fundamental rights.

Interpretation of Religious Freedom:
The Court emphasized that Art. 25 guarantees freedom of conscience and the right to profess, practice, and propagate religion, subject to public order, morality, and health. It reiterated that any restriction on this right must be based on law with statutory force, not mere executive instructions. The Court referred to previous judgments, including those from the American and Australian jurisdictions, to underscore the importance of protecting genuine religious beliefs, even if they appear unconventional.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court concluded that the expulsion of the children violated their fundamental rights under Art. 19(1)(a) and Art. 25(1). The appeal was allowed, and the authorities were directed to readmit the children and facilitate their education. The judgment highlighted India's tradition of tolerance and the need to uphold constitutional principles of religious freedom. The appellants were awarded costs.