Munish Sood
Shimla
The Vande Mataram controversy spilled into the Himachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly on Friday, triggering a sharp confrontation between the ruling Congress and the BJP and leading to a walkout by BJP legislators during the opening day of the monsoon session.
The row erupted against the backdrop of the Congress Working Committee’s decision to retain its 1937 position of singing only the first two stanzas of Vande Mataram at party programmes. The decision has sparked a wider political debate, particularly after Parliament extended statutory protection to the National Song under the amended Prevention of Insults to National Honour law.
Leader of Opposition Jai Ram Thakur strongly objected to the Congress position, making it clear that a resolution of the Congress Working Committee could not dictate the functioning of the State legislature.
Thakur maintained that the CWC’s directions would have no bearing on the proceedings of the Himachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly, which has to function in accordance with the law, constitutional conventions and the rules governing the House. He also insisted that the complete Vande Mataram should be rendered in the Assembly.
The BJP argued that the Legislative Assembly is a constitutional institution and cannot be treated as a platform of any political party. It maintained that an internal resolution of the Congress organisation cannot override the rules, directions or protocol applicable to the House.
Senior BJP leader and Sullah MLA Vipin Singh Parmar, who is also the state BJP vice-president, supported the party’s stand, stressing that Vande Mataram is a National Song and not the property of any political organisation. He maintained that political parties may decide the format of their own organisational programmes, but such decisions cannot be imposed on a constitutional institution.
The controversy has acquired added legal significance following the Prevention of Insults to National Honour (Amendment) Act, 2026, under which statutory protection has been extended to the National Song.
The amended law provides punishment for intentionally preventing the singing of the National Song or causing disturbance to an assembly engaged in its singing.
However, the legislation does not, by itself, state that Vande Mataram must automatically be sung at every government programme or at every sitting of every legislature. The legal question in the Himachal Assembly therefore also involves the applicable Assembly rules, directions of the Speaker and the official protocol governing the particular occasion.
The Union government has separately laid down a protocol for the rendition of the National Song. Where Vande Mataram and the National Anthem are both rendered, the National Song is to precede the National Anthem. The official protocol also specifies the authorised version and the manner of rendition on occasions covered by it.
The Congress has defended its position by referring to the 1937 CWC resolution and maintaining that the first two stanzas have historically been used by the party at its programmes. Its argument is that the decision relates to party functions and cannot be equated with the official status of the National Song.
The BJP, however, has questioned the relevance of a party resolution in the functioning of a constitutional institution and accused the Congress of attempting to impose an organisational decision on the Assembly.
The dispute eventually escalated inside the House, with BJP members raising strong objections and subsequently staging a walkout.
The confrontation has now transformed a national political controversy over Vande Mataram into a direct institutional issue in Himachal Pradesh.
At the heart of the dispute is a fundamental question: Can an internal decision of a political party determine how a National Song is rendered inside a constitutional legislature?
The BJP’s answer is an emphatic no. Its argument is that while a political party may prescribe its own practice at organisational events, the proceedings of the Legislative Assembly must be governed by the Constitution, the Assembly’s rules, the Speaker’s directions and applicable official protocol.
The Congress, meanwhile, continues to maintain that its CWC resolution applies to its own programmes and has sought to separate the party’s historical position from the official legal status of Vande Mataram.
With the monsoon session now underway, the controversy is likely to remain a major political flashpoint in the Assembly.
