New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed a petition challenging a recent Union home ministry circular on singing all the stanzas of the national song at official events.A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul Pancholi was hearing a writ petition filed by Raza academy founder Muhammed Sayeed Noori, LiveLaw reported.Appearing on behalf of Noori, senior advocate Sanjay Hegde argued that the circular could lead to social discrimination against those who did not sing the national song.The court, while dismissing the petition, said that the circular was merely an advisory and that no penalty was associated with the failure to follow its instructions.Hegde argued that even if one could not be penalised for not singing the national song, the circular created a pressure to conform and those who do not follow it could be “singled out and discriminated against”.Calling these apprehensions “premature” and “vague”, the court highlighted that the language of the circulator was not prescriptive in nature and the word “may” had been used.“The word ‘may’ is used. There are no penal or adverse consequences. Nobody has asked that you do it in your academy,” the CJI told the petitioner.In response, Hegde pointed out that people could be compelled to sing the national song as “social demonstration of loyalty.” Solicitor General Tushar Bhanu Mehta, appearing for the Union government, referred to article 51A(a) of the Constitution, to which Hegde responded saying that the article in question only mentioned the national flag and the national anthem. It made no reference to the national song.Asserting that “patriotism could not be compelled”, Hegde referred to the Supreme Court’s judgment in the Bijoe Emmanuel case, where the top court upheld a student’s refusal to sing the national anthem on religious grounds.“If the Constitution has to mean anything, it has to protect individual conscience. Our tradition teaches tolerance. If there’s an advisory without sanctions, your lordships may take it, there are more ways that that advisory is enforced,” Hegde said on being asked if patriotism could not be compelled even for the national anthem.“Please come to us when you’re discriminated on the basis of the advisory,” Justice Bagchi said, adding that “There’s no threat conform… You have some vague apprehensions of discrimination which do not have any clear nexus with the impugned circular.”“It is a premature apprehension; if there are any penal consequences, you come to us,” the CJI said.The circular also stipulated that if the national song and the national anthem, ‘Jana Gana Mana’, are sung or played together, then the national song should be played first. Hegde argued that this diminished the stature of the national anthem.CJI said, “This is only a protocol. The word used is ‘when it is played’. Earlier, we had a national flag protocol, that’s only a protocol, saying if one wants to fly it, what are the things one must follow.” Hegde countered that the protocol surrounding the hoisting of the national flag stemmed from the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act. “The lack of a legal framework for national song renders this advisory unsustainable,” Hegde said. “We will appreciate this argument if it is made mandatory. That part is completely silent, there are no penal consequences, there is no sanction, there is no requirement that it must be sung,” the CJI said.Mehta said, “A person who says patriotism is not compulsory should not be entrusted with a writ in the court”. Taking strong offence at Mehta’s remark, Hegde said, “This is performative. The Constitution is for all. It does not depend on where you stand politically or religiously.”