Bijoe Emmanuel & Ors vs State of Kerala & Ors

0
1967
Bijoe Emmanuel case
In the Supreme Court of India 
Case No.
1987 AIR 748
Petitioner 
Bijoe Emmanuel & Ors
Respondent 
State of Kerala & Ors
Date of Judgment 
Decided on 11 Aug 1986
Bench 
Justice Reddy O. Chinnappa

Background:-

Three children namely Bijoe, Binu and Bindu, studying in a school in Ettumanoor near Kottayam, were expelled from school after they refused to sing the national anthem of India. Their father had asked them not to salute the flag or sing the anthem because it was against their religious faith in Jehovah’s Witnesses. Through their representative, they filed a writ petition in the High Court of Kerala State, seeking to restrain authorities from preventing their school attendance. They alleged that their expulsion amounted to an infringement of their fundamental rights to freedom expression under Article 19 and freedom of religion under Article 25 of the Constitution of India. The High Court dismissed the petition on the ground that no word or thought in the national anthem could offend any religious beliefs.

Subsequently, they appealed the decision to the Supreme Court of India. The Court found their expulsion in violation both Articles 19 and 25 of the Constitution, holding that a reasonable limitation on the right to freedom of expression must be based on a “‘a law’ having statutory force and not a mere executive or departmental instruction.” It found no provisions of law in the country expressly obligates individuals to sing the national anthem and that the applicable regulatory measures by the State of Kerala’s Department of Education lacked statutory force and that were “mere departmental instructions.

Facts:-

1. The appellants-three children belong to a sect called Jehovah’s Witnesses who worship only Jehovah-the Creator and none other. 

2. They refused to sing the National Anthem: Jana Gana Mana because, according to them, it is  against the tenets of  their  religious  faith-not the  words  or the thoughts of the National Anthem-but the singing of it.  They desisted from actual singing only because of their aforesaid honest belief and conviction but  they  used  to stand up  in respectful silence daily, during the  morning assembly when the National Anthem was sung.

3. A Commission was appointed to enquire and report, and it reported that the children were  “law abiding” and that they showed  no disrespect  to the National Anthem. However, under the instructions of Deputy Inspector of Schools, the Head Mistress  expelled the appellants from school from July 26, 1985.

4. A representation by the  father of the children to the Education Authorities  requesting that the children  may be permitted to attend the school pending orders from the Government having failed, the appellants filed  a Writ  Petition in the High Court seeking an order  restraining the  authorities from  preventing them from attending the school. A single  Judge and  then  a Division Bench rejected the prayer of the appellants.

5. Pursuant Article 136 of the Constitution, the father later filed a special leave petition in the Supreme Court of India.

6. On August 11, 1986, the Supreme Court overruled the High Court of Kerala in the case of Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala. The Court held that expelling the children based on their “conscientiously held religious faith” violated the Constitution of India. Justice O. Chinnappa Reddy stated: “No provision of law …obliges anyone to sing.” The Court noted that the right of free speech and expression also includes the right to remain silent and that standing for the national anthem showed proper respect. The Court ordered the school authorities to readmit the children.

Issues Raised:-

The main issue before the Court was whether the expulsion of three children from school for their refusal to sing the national anthem of India was consistent with the constitutional rights to freedom of expression and freedom of religion.

Arguments Advanced:-

The petitioners argued that they do not sing the Anthem though they stand up on such occasions to show their respect to theNational Anthem. They desisted from actual singing only because of their honest belief and conviction that their religion did not permit them to join any rituals except it be in their prayers to Jehovah their God.  They further submitted that they truly and conscientiously believe what they said was  not in doubt. They did not hold their beliefs idly and their conduct was not the outcome of any perversity. They emphasized that singing the anthem was idolatry and an act of unfaithfulness to their God.

While the Respondents justified their actions according to the Kerala Education Act and Rules.

Judgement:-

Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala is profoundly significant because it affirms that no one can be legally compelled to violate his conscientiously held religious beliefs. While recognizing that fundamental rights are not absolute and are subject to public order, morality, and health, the Court limited the State’s ability to impose on its citizens arbitrary and disproportionate restrictions. The decision stated: “To compel each and every pupil to join in the singing of the National Anthem despite his genuine, conscientious religious objection. . . would clearly contravene the rights guaranteed by Art. 19(1)(a) and Art. 25(1) [of the Constitution of India].”

The ruling also safeguards constitutional freedoms for minority groups. The Court further stated: “The real test of a true democracy is the ability of even an insignificant minority to find its identity under the country’s Constitution.” Justice Reddy added: “Our personal views and reactions are irrelevant. If the belief is genuinely and conscientiously held it attracts the protection of Art. 25 [of the Constitution].”

Even today, Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala stands as one of the pillars of free speech in India. Jehovah’s Witnesses are happy to have had a part in contributing to the constitutional freedoms of all citizens in India. 

Edited by Shuvneek Hayer
Quality check – Ankita Jha
Approved & Published – Sakshi Raje

Previous articleK.L.N.V. Veeranjaneyulu vs Union of India
Next articleJarnail Singh and ors. vs Lachhmi Narain Gupta and ors.
Aparajita Balaji
I am Aparajita Balaji, pursuing BBA-LLB(H) from Vivekananda Institute Of Professional Studies, affiliated to Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University. The dynamics of Law has always attracted me, especially the sphere of Criminal Litigation, Corporate Law as well as the Intellectual Property Rights are my areas of interest. I am also passionate about writing. I find a unique level of peace and solace by giving shape to my thoughts, expressed in the form of poems and short-stories. Apart from this, I like watching movies, listening to music and dancing. I have always had a thing for speaking and improving my communication skills therefore, I have participated in a number of debate competitions, moot competitions and have also got few paper published online. In addition to this, I believe in team work. My aim is to work in stimulating environment where I can enhance my knowledge, skill and apply the same in the legal field.