My Comment: This is one of the most regressive judgment of the recent times. When people are talking of borderless world, the Indian SC is reinforcing the parochial notions of nationalism. It is a well-known fact that more lives have been lost in nationalist wars than in any terrorist attack, natural calamity, or epidemic. Nationalism has always been in direct conflict with humanism. However, more distressing is the fact that this judgment shows a clear bias towards nationalism over any other ideology. The courts are not supposed to make ideological statements. And the plain simple interpretation of the Constitution doesn’t lead to any specific practice direction. The norms have been set up by usage, but there is no precedent of any such practice of standing still in cinema halls when national anthem is played. Showing respect to national anthem doesn’t in any way means statue worship while becoming statues oneself. This is a seriously obstructive and narrow-minded gloss of the judiciary on the wide and open language of the Constitution. Indeed, this is an ideological bias, and for this reason per se, this judgment is amenable to review.
About the Author
Ankur Mutreja is an advocate-cum-writer, and his blogs are amongst his modes of expression. He has also authored six books: "Kerala Hugged"; "Light: Philosophy"; "Flare: Opinions"; "Sparks: Satire and Reviews"; "Writings @ Ankur Mutreja"; and "Nine Poems"; which can be downloaded free from the links on the top menu.