Vande Mataram Controversy: The debate has once again erupted regarding Vande Mataram. Actually, this controversy started in Maharashtra when the state government ordered all schools to sing the full version of Vande Mataram between 31 October and 7 November to commemorate the 150th anniversary of Vande Mataram. After this, Samajwadi Party leader Abu Azmi opposed it. Meanwhile, a big question arose whether someone can be punished for refusing to sing Vande Mataram or not? Let us know what is the answer to this question and also what Indian law says on this issue.

Is there any punishment for not singing Vande Mataram?

According to the Indian Constitution and the policy of the Central Government, there is no legal punishment or provision for not singing Vande Mataram. Singing Vande Mataram is completely voluntary and not mandatory. The government clarified in Parliament that no law makes singing or playing of Vande Mataram mandatory. Along with this, there is no punitive provision related to this.

Constitutional status of Vande Mataram

Although Vande Mataram has the honorary status of the national song of India, it does not have the constitutional status like the national anthem Jana Gana Mana. This means that despite the immense value of patriotism in Vande Mataram, it cannot be implemented legally. Citizens are completely free to express their respect in different ways.

Supreme Court’s stance on compulsion

The Supreme Court has repeatedly said that no one can be forced to sing the national anthem, provided he does not disrespect it and just stands respectfully. Along with this, the court refused to make Vande Mataram mandatory and also emphasized that patriotism cannot be measured by any compulsion. Freedom of expression, protected under Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution, gives individuals complete freedom to choose how they express national honour.

Madras High Court judgment 2017

In 2017, the Madras High Court had directed that Vande Mataram be sung in all schools and government offices in Tamil Nadu. But he also made it clear that if any person or organization has real difficulty or problem then it should not be forced. From this it became clear that this order is advisory and not mandatory.

Prevention of Insults to National Honor Act 1971

The Prevention of Insults to National Honor Act 1971 completely regulates the respect for the national flag and the national anthem, but it does not mention controlling the national anthem. Therefore, refusing to sing Vande Mataram is not a crime.

Also read: Why did Congress ban singing Vande Mataram, over which lines was the dispute?

There has been a dispute over the ownership of the late actress Sridevi’s Chennai farm house. Film maker and Sridevi’s husband Boney Kapoor has approached the Madras High Court with this. Boney Kapoor has told that three people are illegally claiming his Chennai farm house.

According to Boney Kapoor, this property located on East Coast Road in Chennai was bought by the late actress Sridevi in ​​1988. The film maker told that since then his family has been using it as a farm house. This farm house has also been available for people for rent on airbnb.

Who are the three contenders for the farm house?
According to The Hindu report, Boney Kapoor told that Sridevi made MC on 19 April 1988. This property was purchased from Sambanda Mudaliar. Mudaliar had three sons and two daughters and in February 1960, the family decided to divide the property among them. Under this, Sridevi bought it. But now Mudaliar’s second wife and two sons are expressing their rights over it.

Boney Kapoor made this appeal to the court
Boney Kapoor has claimed in the petition that Mudaliar’s son’s second wife is legally illegal. According to Boney, Mudaliar’s son married a second marriage on 5 February 1975, while his first wife died on 24 June 1999. Boney Kapoor has also raised questions about giving legal ownership certificate to these three contenders. He has appealed to the court to cancel these certifications while claiming fraud.

Hearing Boney Kapoor’s petition, Justice N. Anand Venkatesh has directed Tambaram taluka tehsildar to take a decision within four weeks.

Madras High Court: The Madras High Court on Thursday (17 April 2025) directed the Tamil Nadu Police to register a case against the state forest minister K Ponmudi. He was removed from the post of party due to the controversial statement made by Ponmudi. The High Court warned the police that if he does not register an FIR against the ruling Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) leader in the state, he will start contempt proceedings by taking self -cognizance against him.

High court judge warns police

Justice N Anand Venkatesh warned the police, saying, “Now the court has taken cognizance of the case. Even if you do not have a complaint, file a case and proceed to the investigation. ”Justice took automatic cognizance in the case and fixed the date of 23 April for further hearing.

The party also took action against Ponmudi

Ponmudi recently raised controversy by commenting on Shaiva-Vishnav in a public meeting in a public meeting. His statement was criticized on a large scale. His own party MP Kanimoi was also among those who criticized Ponmudi. DMK President and Chief Minister MK Stalin removed Ponmudi from the post of Deputy General Secretary of the party, although the senior leader later apologized for his unfair remarks.

In a public function, he made objectionable statements related to women about Hindu religious identity, after which the party also took action on them. He commented on Hindu Tilak, which went viral on social media. DMK MP Kanimozhi also objected to his statement.

BJP accuses Stalin and India alliance

Amit Malviya, the head of BJP IT cell, targeted CM Stalin on this issue. Amit Malviya posted on X and said, “Be it DMK, Congress, TMC or RJD, the members of India coalition look united to insult Hindu beliefs, not from ideology.