It is definitely most commendable and in the fitness of things that the Karnataka High Court at Bengaluru in a most learned, laudable, landmark, logical and latest judgment titled High Court Legal Services Committee vs Principal Secretary, Govt of Karnataka & Ors in Writ Petition No.4635 of 2024 (GM-RES-PIL) that was pronounced as recently as on April 4, 2025 has issued a slew of directions to both Central and State authorities to strictly implement laws prohibiting use of the National Emblems, names and government symbols on vehicles by those not authorized to use them. It must be mentioned here that the Karnataka High Court was hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that had been filed by the High Court Legal Services Committee which had sought a ban on the improper use of national emblems and names that are associated with the national flag. It cannot go unnoticed that the Court most explicitly said that the misuse of symbols, seals, flags, emblems and names needed to be addressed due to their illegal and unauthorized display in various locations and forms.
At the very outset, this brief, brilliant, bold and balanced judgment authored by Hon’ble The Chief Justice Mr Justice NV Anjaria for a Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court at Bengaluru sets the ball in motion by first and foremost putting forth in para 1 that, “National Symbols and National Emblems represent pride and honour of our nation and country. They signify sovereignty for the country. For instance, as the trio-colour does it.
1.1 Not only that, these Symbols, Emblems and Names, disseminate nation’s illuminating stories and preach ideals of our glorious history, essentials of culture, fundamental values and national ethos. They in their style, projection, make and mould, often carry landmarks of Indian civilization and history. The National Symbols and Emblems are identity in themselves which stand to elate and embellish the status and dignity of the country.
1.2 An honour ensured to the National Symbols, Emblems and Names is also an honour accorded and extended to our country. The misuse, misprojection and misstatement of these Symbols, Emblems and Names have to be prevented resolutely.”
To put things in perspective, the Division Bench while laying the background of the case envisages in para 2 stating that, “The present is a public interest petition filed by the High Court Legal Services Committee.
2.1 The prayer made is to direct the respondent-authorities to implement the provisions of the Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950 and the Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Rules, 1982. It also seeks to implement the provisions of the State Emblem of India (Prohibition of Improper Use) Act, 2005 with the State Emblem of India (Regulation of Use) Rules, 2007 and Rules of 2010. The petition along with the aforesaid prayers further prays for implementation of the provisions of the Rule 145 (A) of the Karnataka Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 and Rules 50 and 51 of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989.”
Quite significantly, we observe that the Division Bench while citing the relevant case law points out in para 5.3 that, “The Madras High Court in S. Mukachand Bothra (deceased) Vs. Central Government represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs and others, [(2022) 1 Mad LJ 434] had an occasion to consider the writ petition in which the direction was sought against a private person who misused the National Emblem for his personal use and personal gain. The petitioner was a son of the original writ petitioner who wanted to pursue the issue inasmuch as his father was victimized due to misuse of Indian National Emblem by Ex-Member of Parliament.
5.3.1 The Ex-Member of Parliament had used the Indian National Emblem on his letter pad to lodge a complaint against the original writ petitioner. It was contended that the authorities had entertained the complaint and had arrested the father of the petitioner keeping him in custody for 21 days. It was contended by the petitioner that his father was a financier in cinema field and when his father demanded return of the loan amount, the disputes arose and for the purpose of ensuring arrest of petitioner’s father, National Emblem was misused.
5.3.2 The Madras High Court in Mukachand Bothra (supra) expressed its concern about the misuse of the emblem and observed about the implementation of the law in that regard in the following words. Extracting paragraph 53, “The very idea of misuse of Emblems, Flags, Symbols, Names, Stickers etc., are to escape from the penal actions by the law enforcing authorities. Therefore, implementation of the Act and Rules are of paramount importance in order to minimise the commission of offences by unauthorisedly using such Emblems, Names, Flags, Stickers etc,. The very statement of object and reasons of the Act itself enumerates that the enactment was made to prevent misuse. Therefore, implementation of the Act and Rules are vital for the purpose of prevention of crimes, commission of offences and violations etc,. Unfortunately, the Act and Rules are not at all implemented by the competent authorities. It is painful to record that not even a single case has been registered in the entire State of Tamil Nadu, under the provisions of the Act and Rules. This being the situation, an urgent actions are imminent considering the growing tendency of misuse of Emblems, Stickers, Names, Government Symbols etc., in vehicles, buildings, letter pads etc,.””
Notably, the Division Bench was forthright in noting clearly in para 5.4 that, “It is true and unfortunate that there is tendency amongst the constitutional authorities who are the former authorities no more in the office, the former Members of the Parliament or Ex-Legislators have been misusing the Emblem, Flags, Names, etc. by fixing them in their letter heads and the number plates of the vehicles. This conduct is both unfortunate and depreciable. The misuse of Symbols, Seals, Flags, Emblem and Names have to be countered for their illegal and unauthorised display at various places in various manners.”
It would be instructive to note that the Bench notes in para 5.5 that, “The Madras High Court in Mukachand Bothra (supra) viewed such misusing of the emblems, etc. seriously to observe that the constitutional authorities while holding office and after demitting the office are expected to maintain good conduct in all respects.”
Quite alarmingly, the Division Bench points out candidly in para 6 of this robust judgment stating that, “The state of affairs prevails in the society which needs to be immediately remedied by the law enforcing agencies that the people at large are witnessed on public roads and public places and also the institutions who have been unauthorisedly using the emblem, government names, department names in contravention of Rule 10 of the State Emblem of India (Regulation of Use), 2007 aforementioned that the said rule contains a prohibition.”
As a corollary, the Division Bench then holds in para 7 that, “In light of foregoing discussion, the prayer in the petition deserves to be allowed.”
It cannot be lost sight of that the Division Bench then holds in para 8 that, “A writ of mandamus is hereby issued to
(i) the Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India
(ii) the Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport, Government of India
(iii) the Director, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Government of India
(iv) the Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Government of Karnataka and
(v) the Principal Secretary, Department of Transport, Government of Karnataka, to strictly implement the provisions of,
(a) The Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950;
(b) The Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Rules, 1982;
(c) The State Emblem of India (Prohibition of Improper Use) Act, 2005;
(d) The State Emblem of India (Regulation of use) Rules, 2007 as well as Rules of 2010;
(e) All applicable provisions of Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989, in particular Rules 50 and 51, as well as the applicable rules of Karnataka Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 , in particular 145-A;
Be it noted, the Division Bench then notes in para 9 that, “The respondents are directed to instruct and require all implementing authorities below them to ensure the compliance of the aforementioned statutory provisions of the Acts and the Rules.”
Most significantly, most remarkably and so also most forthrightly, the Division Bench encapsulates in para 10 what constitutes the cornerstone of this notable judgment postulating that, “In addition to the above general directions to implement the Act and the Rules, the following specific directions are given which would further sub-serve the public purpose,
(i) The respondent-authorities are directed that notice shall be issued by way of different public modes through print and visual media to remove all kinds of unauthorised Flags, Emblems, Names, Symbols, Stickers, Seals, Logos of any kind which are prohibited. There shall be instructions to all to remove such emblems and discontinue unauthorised use thereof within four weeks.
(ii) The higher-ups of the respondents shall chalk out the methods and programmes to sensitise the officials and implementing authorities to see and ensure that the misuse of National Emblem and National Symbols in various forms do not occur, stopped and prevented.
(iii) Where such conduct of using them unauthorisedly is noticed, they are dealt with sternly.
(iv) The respondents shall instruct the implementing authorities to register the cases under the provisions of the relevant Acts and the Rules wherever the complaints with regard to the misuse of the National Symbols and Emblems are found correct. Necessary circulars in this regard should be issued.
(v) The school children or the law students shall also be involved in spreading awareness against misuse and unauthorised display of National Symbols and Emblems by any person, body or organization.
(vi) The respondents should frame regulations for imposition of fine and for cancellation of driving licence by providing such penal measures in the relevant Rules for violating law on use of the National Emblems and Symbols.
(vii) The traffic police should be educated by undertaking programmes and imparting training to keep observance and proper vigil to take penal action whenever they come across the violation of the kind and nature.”
Finally, we observe that the Division Bench then draws the curtains of this noteworthy judgment by directing and holding in para 11 that, “The present public interest petition is disposed of in terms of the aforesaid observations and directions.”
All said and done, we thus see that the Karnataka High Court beyond a straw of doubt definitely deserves huge compliments for voluntarily ensuring in particular that it issues a slew of most commendable directions to combat, check and completely crush the most reprehensible growing misuse of national flags, emblems and symbols so rampantly. One really fervently hopes now that both the State and Centre will most strictly ensure that these most laudable directions that have been issued are most rigorously implemented in letter and spirit! There can be definitely just no denying or disputing it!
