Calcutta High Court Addresses Vande Mataram Controversy

Amid the ongoing debate surrounding Vande Mataram, a recent remark from the Calcutta High Court has encapsulated the essence of the controversy. The court asserted that "the sky will not fall" if someone sings Vande Mataram. It also highlighted that in numerous Christian schools across the nation, students from different faiths participate in prayers without converting to another religion. Therefore, if an Indian expresses respect for their homeland by singing Vande Mataram, what is the objection?

Acting Chief Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty raised pivotal questions during the hearing that shifted the focus of the entire debate. He emphasized that "the sky will not fall" if someone sings Vande Mataram. He pointed out that in many Christian institutions, all students pray to Jesus Christ; does this imply that students of other faiths believe their religion is changing? The judge clearly stated that if a person is asked to recite a line outside their religious tradition, does that mean they are abandoning their faith? The court also inquired whether anyone has faced punishment for not singing Vande Mataram, and if not, what is the basis for such fear and opposition?

It is noteworthy that the Calcutta High Court was hearing a public interest petition challenging a notification that mandates the singing of all six stanzas of Vande Mataram in madrasas. The petitioner argued that during the constitution's formation, extensive discussions led to only the first two stanzas being recognized as the national song, thus making the requirement of all six stanzas unjustified. Concerns were also raised that legal enforcement could escalate communal tensions.

Recently, Parliament passed the National Honours (Amendment) Bill, 2026, which grants Vande Mataram the same legal protection previously reserved for the national anthem, Jana Gana Mana. Now, if an individual deliberately obstructs or disrespects the singing of Vande Mataram, they could face up to three years in prison and fines.

Some opposition parties have criticized this move as an imposition of nationalism, while the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) has expressed its dissent, arguing that certain parts of Vande Mataram depict the motherland as a goddess, which contradicts Islamic beliefs. The board referenced Articles 19 and 25 of the Constitution and the Supreme Court's Bijoe Emmanuel vs. State of Kerala ruling, asserting that no citizen should be compelled to adopt a song or symbol that conflicts with their religious beliefs. They further stated that patriotism and worship are distinct concepts, and while Muslims love their country, venerating it as a deity contradicts their religious principles.

Historically, Vande Mataram is not merely a song but one of the most powerful calls of the freedom movement. Composed by Bankim Chandra Chatterjee, it became a symbol of resistance against British rule. Rabindranath Tagore rendered it at a Congress session, and countless freedom fighters adopted it as their rallying cry. However, in later years, some verses referencing the divine feminine faced objections from Muslim organizations, leading the Congress Working Committee in 1937 to recommend singing only the first two stanzas at national events.

Despite the ongoing debate, the fundamental question remains: Is referring to India as "Mother" against any religion? The land that gave birth, identity, and rights to its citizens deserves respect. If someone views the veneration of Bharat Mata solely through a religious lens, are they not overlooking the national and historical significance of this song?

Ultimately, the controversy surrounding Vande Mataram transcends the song itself. It tests the mindset that determines whether we regard India merely as a place to live or as our motherland. The court's message is clear: national respect does not jeopardize faith. Thus, it is essential to question those who shy away from calling India "Mother" or singing Vande Mataram: why is there shame in honoring the land that has given us everything?