send mail to support@abhimanu.com mentioning your email id and mobileno registered with us! if details not recieved
Resend Opt after 60 Sec.
By Loging in you agree to Terms of Services and Privacy Policy
Claim your free MCQ
Please specify
Sorry for the inconvenience but we’re performing some maintenance at the moment. Website can be slow during this phase..
Please verify your mobile number
Login not allowed, Please logout from existing browser
Please update your name
Subscribe to Notifications
Stay updated with the latest Current affairs and other important updates regarding video Lectures, Test Schedules, live sessions etc..
Your Free user account at abhipedia has been created.
Remember, success is a journey, not a destination. Stay motivated and keep moving forward!
Refer & Earn
Enquire Now
My Abhipedia Earning
Kindly Login to view your earning
Support
Context: In a recent incident, an executive magistrate in Srinagar sent 11 men to jail after they were detained for allegedly not rising for the National Anthem at an event.
It allows an Executive Magistrate the power to any person who may engage in activities that could disrupt public tranquillity or commit wrongful acts likely to disturb public tranquillity.
The Executive Magistrate can demand an explanation from such individuals as to why they should not be compelled to execute a bond for maintaining peace.
This authority can be exercised for a maximum duration of one year.
It allows a police officer who knows of a design to commit a cognizable offence to “arrest, without orders from a Magistrate and a warrant, the person so designing.”
It means to be required to appear before the investigating officer or the court on a given date.
It is usually used in court orders to indicate that an accused is “bound” by a surety or personal guarantee to appear before authorities.
Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, (1971): Section 3 of the Act prescribes jail up to three years and/ or a fine for “intentionally preventing the singing of the National Anthem or causing disturbance to any assembly engaged in such singing”.
Article 51-A(a) of the Constitution makes it every citizen’s duty to “abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals and institutions, the national flag and the national anthem”.
The law around alleged disrespect to the National Anthem was laid down by the Supreme Court in its 1986 judgment in Bijoe Emmanuel & Ors vs State Of Kerala & Ors.
The court granted protection to three children (in school), who did not join in the singing of the National Anthem at their school.
The court held that forcing them to sing the Anthem violated their fundamental right to religion under Article 25 of the Constitution.
Standing up respectfully when the National Anthem is sung but not singing oneself “does not either prevent the singing of the National Anthem or cause disturbance to an assembly engaged in such singing so as to constitute the offence”.
The SC revisited the Bijoe Emmanuel Case and passed an interim order that “All the cinema halls in India shall play the National Anthem before the feature film starts and all present in the hall are obliged to stand up to show respect to the National Anthem.”
The court had also ordered that “entry and exit doors shall remain closed” when the Anthem is played, and that “when the National Anthem shall be played…it shall be with the National Flag on the screen.”
By: Shubham Tiwari ProfileResourcesReport error
Access to prime resources
New Courses