Sanchayita Lahkar

The High Court of Orissa Division Bench of Justice Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Justice Manash Ranjan Pathak has directed the State Government to create a State Level Task Force to monitor and review suggestions, objections and reports of misuse of the State Emblem of India on a monthly basis. Noting that the Emblem reflects national values and is intended to unite citizens, the Court ordered the State to frame an SOP for the Task Force, set up a unified online reporting portal for citizen complaints, ensure coordination across departments and local bodies, and require institutions to rectify depiction errors within six weeks of being informed, while treating earlier compliance directions issued by another High Court as part of its own.

The writ petition was instituted as a public interest litigation alleging improper depiction and misuse of the State Emblem of India at various public places and official events within the State of Odisha. The petitioner contended that the Emblem was displayed without the motto “Satyameva Jayate” at Indira Gandhi Park, Bhubaneswar, and that during the 75th Republic Day Parade on 26th January, 2024, the tableau of the State of Odisha omitted the motto below the lion capital and did not correctly depict the Ashoka Chakras. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus for immediate corrective steps and for creation of mass awareness regarding lawful use of the Emblem.

Also Read: Welfare Of Child Paramount But Not Sole Consideration In Custody Disputes; Courts Must Also Weigh Conduct, Finances And Children’s Comfort: Supreme Court

The State, in its affidavit, acknowledged its statutory responsibility to prevent improper use of the Emblem and admitted that certain mistakes had occurred. It also indicated that remedial measures would be undertaken. The Court considered the statutory framework under the Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950 and the State Emblem of India (Prohibition of Improper Use) Act, 2005, along with the State Emblem of India (Regulation of Use) Rules, 2007.

The Court observed that “the Symbol, Flag, and/or Emblem were used symbolizing honour, right and the authority exercised to achieve the object of justice, ethos behind the purity of the administration and above all, inculcating the sense of values towards the motherland.” It recorded that the National Emblem “not only encompasses the honour and pride to any nation but also depicts its historical, cultural and moral values.”

It further observed: “The National Symbol or the Emblem adopted by the nation percolates a sense of responsibilities and core values of life which at times, is distinct from the other nations within the globe. Preservation of the core cultural, ethical and moral values and its dissemination through the Symbol, Flag and Emblem is aimed not only to unite the people of the country but to be reminded of the basic values of life.”

It recorded: “After the independence achieved by the people of our country from the colonial rule, the first and foremost task, which was felt inevitable to represent the sovereign republic identity and its values in adopting the National Flag, National Anthem and also the National Emblem. It was proposed in the Constituent Assembly that the National Emblem should be inspired from the mode of rule and the governance embraced by the capital of Ashoka, which illuminates and/or resolute the sovereignty, unity and ancient civilization and its heritage.”

Referring to the statutory background, the Court noted that “despite such preventive law being in place since 1950, the improper use of the Emblem continued” and that a specific legislation was enacted in 2005 to regulate its use. The Bench stated that the Schedule to the 2005 Act “vividly contains the description and the design of the Emblem with the motto, ‘Satyameva Jayate’- ‘Truth alone triumphs’ written in Devanagari Script below the profile of the lion capital.”

On the issue of continued misuse, the Court observed that “it admits no ambiguity that despite the preventive and/or prohibitory legislation being in place, the misuse appears to continue, not with any malice or ill motive but by mistake, because of the lack of proper awareness having inculcated into the users of the said State Emblem.” It further recorded that such instances were not confined to Odisha but were noticed in other States as well.

The Bench stated that “we have noticed that because of the lack of proper awareness, the misuse of the State Emblem of India appears to be a reality.” It added that “the awareness must be generated across the people of the country, including the State of Odisha and the sense of responsible use of the Emblem must be ubiquitously ensured.” The Court also clarified that the directions issued by the Karnataka High Court in a similar matter would be treated as integral to the directions passed in the present PIL.

The Court directed that “the State shall create a State Level Task Force, which would comprise of a high-ranking Officer of the Home Department to act as the Chairman thereof with one Member from Police, Transport, Education, I & PR, Law, Urban and Panchayati Raj to monitor and review any suggestion, objection and/or reporting of the misuse of the State Emblem of India on a monthly basis. The State shall make a Standard Operating Procedure for functioning of the said State Level Task Force and would also review the reports of the said Task Force to be submitted on a monthly basis.”

Also Read: “Scurrilous Remarks Against Constitutional Functionary”: Orissa High Court Pulls Up DSP For Aspersions On Advocate General

“The State shall create a unified online reporting portal as a single window for accessibility of every citizen of the country to upload the photos, videos, geo-tagged complaints, which should contain the Frequent Asked Questions (FAQs) illustrating the permissible and the prohibited uses and the timely intervention and the action to be taken shall be uploaded under the action taking icon.” It added that “such portal not only to be integrated to the State Level Task Force but also be integrated with the District e-offices to provide an auto route to the DMs, SPs, and the RTOs.”

“The convergence and the synergy to be created in the different Departments of the Government, which would include the local bodies and the civic bodies for due implementation of the provisions of the said Act ensuring not only timely intervention but may prevent any such misuse. All the institutions using the State Emblem must be communicated in case of any mistake in depicting the State Emblem to remedy and rectify such mistakes within six weeks from the date of such communication.”

Advocates Representing the Parties:

For the Petitioners: Mr. P.K. Dutta, Advocate

For the Respondents: Mr. P.K. Parhi, Deputy Solicitor General of India; Mr. J.B. Mohanty, Central Government Counsel; Mr. Debashis Tripathy, Addl. Govt. Advocate; Mr. Manoj Kumar Mishra, Senior Advocate (Amicus Curiae); Mr. Subir Palit, Senior Advocate (Amicus Curiae)

Case Title: Alone Trust v. Union of India and Others

Case Number: W.P.(C) No. 33077 of 2024

Bench: Chief Justice Harish Tandon, Justice Manash Ranjan Pathak