DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA

NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

SABBAVARAM, VISAKHAPATNAM, A.P., INDIA

PROJECT TITLE
INTERPRETATION OF CASES UNDER EMBLEMS AND NAMES (PREVENTION
OF IMPROPER USE) ACT, 1950

SUBJECT
IOS

NAME OF THE FACULTY

PROF. DR. ARUNA SRI LAKSHMI

NAME OF THE CANDIDATE

ASISH ANSUMAN MISHRA
ROLL NUMBER-2019LLB036
SEMESTER-06

1
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I genuinely want to advance my sincere gratefulness to our regarded Prof. Dr. Aruna Sri
Lakshmi for giving me a golden chance to take up this research project that is- “Interpretation
of cases under Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950” I have
attempted my best to gather data about the task in different potential manners to portray a
clear picture about the given project.

2
 ABSTRACT

This project mainly focusses on the Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act,
1950. The provisions of this Act, their meaning, Authorities under the Act, penal provisions
under the act and prohibitions of use of certain emblems and names under the act have been
highlighted in this project. The overview of the legislation and the working of the legislation
have been discussed in this project. The method and principle of interpretation used by the
courts while deciding the cases under the act has also been discussed in this project. Five
related cases are analysed in this project in detail, to understand the principle of interpretation
involved while deciding the cases under this act. These case analysis of cases gives a clear
understanding regarding the true interpretation of the provisions of the cases. To understand
the manner in which the court decide whether a particular provision of the act is applicable or
not applicable to a particular case is the main focus of this project.

3
 TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS

ABBREVIATIONS EXPANSIONS
UN United Nations
WHO World Health Organisation
WMO World Meteorological Organisation
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and
Cultural Organization
SC Supreme Court
HC High Court
ICAO International Civil Aviation Organisation
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency
IOC International Olympic Committee
AIR All India Reporter
AC Appeal Cases
HLC House of Lords Cases
Raj Rajasthan
AP Andhra Pradesh
Mad Madras
LQ Legit Quest

4
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Objective of the Study 6

Scope of the Study 6
Research Question 6
Hypothesis 6
Research Methodology 6
Literature Review 6-7
Significance of the Study 7
Introduction 7-8
Overview of the Legislation 8-11
Principle and Method of Interpretation used 11-13
by the Courts While Deciding Cases under
Legislation
Analysis of Cases Related to the Legislation 13-22
Conclusion 22
Bibliography 23

5
OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY-

The objective of the project is to understand and study about interpretation of cases under
Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950. Another important objective
of this project is to get an overview of the provisions of the Act.

SCOPE OF THE STUDY-

The scope of the study is restricted to the overview of the legislation, method and principle of
interpretation involved in cases under the legislation and case analysis of five cases under this
legislation.

RESEARCH QUESTION-

1. Whether the literal interpretation is used by the courts while deciding the cases under
the Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950.
2. Whether the penal provision contained in the Act is of mandatory nature.
3. Whether the courts have taken the help of statement of objects and reasons of the
legislation while deciding the cases under the act.

HYPOTHESIS-

1. The penal provision under the act is given in clear and unambiguous form and is of
mandatory nature.
2. The courts have utilised the literal and strict interpretation while deciding most of the
cases under the Act.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY-The researcher has adopted doctrinal method of research.

Explanatory and analytical method of study has been adopted by the researcher while
undertaking the research. The primary sources of the research are case laws and legislations.
The secondary sources of the research are articles, books and reports.

LITERATURE REVIEW-

BOOKS-

PRINCIPLES OF STATUTORY INTERPRETATION, GP Singh 1- This book has

described various principles of interpretation of statutes with the help of Indian and foreign
cases. The author has discussed about the basic principles, guiding rules and interpretation of

1
GP SINGH, PRINCIPLES OF STATUTORY INTERPRETATION (15th ed., LexisNexis 2021).

6
remedial and penal statues in detail. The description of principles of interpretation by the
author has been of great help for the researcher while undertaking the research.

ARTICLES-

1. THE USE AND MISUSE OF EMBLEMS AND STATE SYMBOLS, Wasim

beg2- This article highlight about the provisions of Emblems and Names (Prevention
of Improper Use) Act, 1950. The specific focus is on penal provisions. Some
loopholes of the legislation have been highlighted in this project. In the conclusion,
the writer has highlighted about the importance of the legislation.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY-

This project is of great help for understanding the provisions of the legislation in detail and
various authorities who are empowered to take actions under the legislation. The principles of
interpretations which are relied by the courts while deciding the cases under this legislation
has also been highlighted in this project. The case analysis of five cases decided by the SC
and HCs of the country will also be great help in understanding the proper meaning and
interpretation of the provisions of the Act.

INTRODUCTION-

The Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950 was enacted by the
parliament of India to prevent and prohibit the improper use of emblems and names of
governmental, non-governmental and international institutions. The names of certain
prominent figures are also covered under the ambit of the act. The act was passed as multiple
instances came to the knowledge of government where, certain persons and entities are
utilising the names and emblems for their professional and commercial benefits. Multiple
cases come before the court of law under the provisions of this legislation. This Act contains
certain penal provision. The court while deciding cases where the applicability of the
provisions of this act are questioned, generally use the literal interpretation as the provisions
are given in unambiguous and clear form. In some cases, the court also reads the statute as a
whole in its context to understand the main objective and purpose of the statute. Most of the
cases related to this statute involve the actual interpretation of the penal provision of the
statute. The manner in which the courts of this country have interpreted various provisions of

2
Wasim Beg, The Use and Misuse of Emblems and State Symbols, SCC Online, June 6, 2020.

7
this act depending upon the facts and circumstances of different cases is the main focus of
this project.

OVERVIEW OF THE LEGISLATION-

During the 1940s without having proper authority and for commercial benefits, the emblem
and official seals and the name of UN and related abbreviations were misused. To prevent
such type of misuse the General assembly of UN which is one of its principal organs of the
UN recommended all the member nations of UN to take necessary legislative measures to
prevent such misuse. Similarly, during the same time the WHO, also recommended the states
to take certain legislative measures to prevent the misuse of its name, emblem and the seal.

From the point of view of India, during that time, many instances were reported where there
was unauthorised use of national flag and emblem of India. In some places, the pictures of
freedom fighters like Mahatma Gandhi and other prominent national leaders were used by
some entities to get the popularity among masses and obtain significant commercial benefits.
But, actually this practice by some of the entities were an offence to the sentiments of people
of our country.

At that time, though there were multiple legislations in force in India, but there were no
provisions in any such enactments to prevent these types of misuses by various entities. So, in
this backdrop, to mainly prevent the misuse and improper use of certain specific emblems
and the names of some prominent figures of India for professional and commercial purposes,
the Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Bill was introduced in the Indian
parliament.

The statement of objects and reasons of the legislation states that, “The general assembly of
UN recommended in 1946 to the members of UN to take appropriate legislative measures to
prevent the use, without proper authority and in particular for commercial purposes of the
emblem, the official seal and the name of UN and of the abbreviations of that name. WHO
also gave similar recommendations to the member nations.”

Regarding the conditions prevailing in India, it was stated that, “Instances have also come to
light of the use in India (and abroad) of the Indian National Flag and emblem and of the
names or pictorial representation of Mahatma Gandhi and other national leaders, for
commercial and trade purposes and in a manner likely to offend the sentiments of the
people.” Regarding the lack of any legislative preventions to stop such improper use, it was

8
stated that, “The provisions of the Indian Trade Marks Act, 1940, Indian patents and Designs
Act, 1911, and the Indian Companies Act, 1913, are not adequate to prevent these abuses.”

Highlighting the aim of the act, it was stated that, “The Bill seeks to prevent the improper use
of these names, emblems, for the purpose of trade, business, profession, patent or design and
to impose a penalty for misuse of emblems.”

After receiving the green signal from both houses of the parliament the bill received
presidential assent on 1/03/1950. The act came into force on 1/09/1950. The long title of the
act states that, “An act to prevent the improper use of certain emblems and names for
professional and commercial purposes.” The act contains one schedule where the names of
emblems are enlisted. The central government by this legislation aims to prohibit the
improper use of the enlisted emblems contained in the schedule of the act. The act is
applicable to the whole India and as per section 1 of the act the act also applies to the citizens
outside India. Section 3, 4 and 5 are the most important provisions of this legislation. Section
3 contains a non obstante clause.

Section 3 states that, “no person shall, except in such cases and under such conditions as may
be prescribed by the Central Government, use, or continue to use, for the purpose of any
trade, business, profession or in the title of any patent, or in any trade mark or design, any
name or emblem specified in the Schedule or any colourable imitation thereof without the
previous permission of the Central Government.” This provision makes it clear that there is a
prohibition on using of the names of emblems or their imitations for commercial purpose
without obtaining previous permission of the central government.

Section 4 of the act also contains a non obstante clause. Section 4 of the act states that, “No
competent authority shall register any company, firm or other body of persons which bears
any name, or register a trade mark or design which bears any emblem or name, or grant a
patent in respect of an invention which bears a title containing any emblem or name, If the
use of such name or emblem is in contravention of section 3.” The competent authority under
the act has been defined under section 2 of the act. The competent authorities under the act
are the authority who have the power to register a company or to grant patents or to register
any design and trademarks.

This section specifically deals with registration of companies, patents and trademarks. If the
name of the company, patent of trade mark is bearing any name of emblems listed under the
schedule of the act. If the question arises before the competent authority whether the emblem

9
in question is specified in clear language in the schedule of the act or the emblem is a
colourable imitation of such emblems mentioned in the schedule of the act, then the
competent authority can refer the question to central government and the decision of the
central government in this regard will be final.
Section 5 of the act contains the penal provision and imposes penalty. The language of this
section is very clear. Section 5 of the act clearly states that, “Any person who contravenes the
provisions of section 3 shall be punishable with fine which may extend to five hundred
rupees.” Section 6 of the act talks about obtaining the previous sanction of the central
government before launching prosecution of an offence committed under this act. This is a
mandatory provision.

Section 7 of the act contains the savings clause. This section essentially states that the
prosecution initiated against any person under this act does not bar the authorities to launch
prosecution under the provisions of any other act. Section 8 of the act enables the central
government to amend the list of emblems contained in the schedule of the act. Section 9 of
the act talks about the power of the central government to make rules and under this provision
only, the rules were made by the central government in 1982.

The schedule contains the list of certain emblems and names, improper use of which has been
prohibited by the act. Some of those are- “UN, WHO, Indian National Flag, the government
of India, Government of any state, St. John Ambulance Association, President of India,
Governor of any state, UNESCO, Any name suggesting patronage of government of India or
government of state or any government body constituted under any law, Mahatma Gandhi,
Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, Jawaharlal Nehru, Indira Gandhi, Prime Minister of India,
ICAO, Interpol, WMO, IAEA, Parliament, Legislature of any state, SC, HC, Ramakrishna
Math and Mission, IOC, Bharat Scouts and Guides, National Youth Emblem.”

Working of the Legislation-

This act contains penal provision. A case can be filed against the person or any entity which
act in contravention with the provisions of this act. If the case is proven, then the fine can be
imposed. This act does not restrict the application of any other law. To launch the prosecution
under this act, previous sanction of central government is required. All the competent
authorities under this act are empowered to not to register any company, patent or design
which have any emblems and names, the improper use of which is prohibited under this act.
They are the authorities who decide whether there is any contravention with the provisions of

10
the act. These authorities can also refer the question regarding contravention to the central
government.

Section 3 and 4 of this Act contains the provisions which prohibits the improper use of
emblems. The central government is the supreme authority of this legislation. Majority of the
cases filed under this legislation are related to section 3,4 and 5 of the Act. These three
provisions are the crux of this Act. The penalty provided under the act is very less. Hence, in
recent times, the central government has proposed to increase the fine from Rs. 500 to 1
Lakh. Though there is no provision for the repeat offenders in the original legislation, the
central government has proposed to impose a fine of Rs. 5 lakh and Jail time on repeat
offenders under the Act.

PRINCIPLE AND METHOD OF INTERPRETATION USED BY THE COURTS

WHILE DECIDING CASES UNDER THE LEGISLATION-

In most of the cases which are decided by the courts related to this act, the interpretation of
section 3, 4 and 5 comes into question. Section 3 prohibits the improper use of emblem or
names which are covered under the scope of the act without obtaining the previous
permission from the central government. Section 4 talks about not allowing the registration of
company, patents or trademarks which are against the provisions of the act. Section 5
provides for the penalty. After going through the cases, it can be said that three major
principles of interpretation have been used by the courts while deciding the cases coming
under this legislation. These three are-

Statute must be read as a whole in its context-

The SC in one case while deciding the constitutionality of some of the provisions of the act
had applied this principle and read the statute as a whole and in its context to find out the real
objective and aim of the legislation. Finally, the court held that the provisions are
constitutional. The meaning of this rule is, “When the question arises to the meaning of a
certain provision in a statute, it is not only legitimate but proper to read that provision in its
context. The context here means, the statute as a whole, the previous state of law, other
statutes in pari materia, the general scope of the statute and the mischief that it was intended
to remedy.”3

3
R S Raghunath v. State of Karnataka, AIR 1992 SC 81.

11
Lord Davey in the case of Canada Sugar Refining Co v. R4, stated that, “Every clause of a
statute should be construed with reference to the context and other clauses of the Act, so as,
as far as possible, to make a consistent enactment of the whole statute or series of statutes
relating to the subject matter.”

In the case of Poppatlal Shah v. State of Madras 5, it was stated that, “It is a settled rule of
construction that to ascertain the legislative intent, all the constituent parts of a statute are to
be taken together and each word, phrase or sentence is to be considered in the light of general
purpose of the act itself.” This is the exact principle which was used by the court while
deciding the constitutionality of certain important provisions of the act. The court read the
statute as a whole along with the statement of objects and reasons to find out the true purpose
of the act.

Another important point to note regarding the principle is that, “When the context makes the
meaning of a word quite clear, it becomes unnecessary to search for and select a particular
meaning out of the diverse meanings a word is capable of, according to the lexicographers.” 6
This rule clearly supports the literal interpretation rule.

To sum up, this rule of interpretation clearly states that while finding out the original meaning
and purpose of the statute or a provision of the statute, the statute must be read as a whole.
This rule has been utilised by the court while deciding cases under the Act.

Literal interpretation-

As per this principle of interpretation, “The words of a statute are first understood in their
natural, ordinary or popular sense and phrases and sentences are construed according to their
grammatical meaning, unless that leads to some absurdity or unless there is something in the
context, or in the object of the statute to suggest the contrary.” 7 Plain and ordinary meaning
of the word should be preferred while interpretation. When literal rule of construction does
not give rise to any absurdity, then it should be followed by the courts. The presumption is
that the legislature chooses appropriate words to express what it intends. The natural and
ordinary meaning of the words should not be departed from by the judges.

The language of the statute discussed in the project is very clear and unambiguous, hence the
courts have used the literal rule of interpretation in almost all the decided cases.
4
Canada Sugar Refining Co v. R, (1898) AC 735.
5
Poppatlal Shah v. State of Madras, AIR 1953 SC 274.
6
Mango Singh v. Election Tribunal, AIR 1957 SC 871.
7
Grey v. Pearson, (1857) 6 HLC 61.

12
Interpretation of mandatory and discretionary provisions-

Section 3, 4 and 5 of the Act contains the word “shall” and “may”. The interpretation of these
words actually helps the judges to find out the actual meaning and scope of a particular
provision. When the word “shall” is used in a statute, then there is a presumption that the
particular provision is mandatory in nature. The SC in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh v.
Babu Ram8 has held that, “When a statute uses the word ‘shall’, prima facies it is mandatory,
but the court may ascertain the real intention of the legislature by carefully attending to the
whole scope of the statute.” In one case, “Keeping in view the object and purpose of New
York convention that is smooth and swift enforcement of foreign awards, the word ‘shall’ in
section 47 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was read as ‘may’.”9

The word “shall” impose an obligation on the party and the word may confers a discretionary
power. When the scope and the object of the statute is very clear, then the word “shall” must
be treated as mandatory.

ANALYSIS OF CASES RELATED TO THE LEGISLATION-

The five cases discussed under this chapter highlight the principles of interpretation involved
in interpreting the provisions of the Act. In most of the cases sections 3,4 and 5 of the Act
have been interpreted by the courts of our country. Whether the prohibiting provisions and
penal provisions of the Act applies to the facts and circumstances of the case have been
analysed by the courts in the below mentioned cases.

M/s. Sable Waghire & Company & Others v. Union of India & Others10

Brief Summary of Facts-

The petitioner in this case were involved in manufacturing, marketing and selling bidis with
the name “Chhatrapati Shivaji Bidi”. One of the important material facts is, “The firm is the
sole proprietor of the Registered Trade Mark No. 12549 in respect of the pictorial
representation of the picture of Chhatrapati Shivaji and of the Registered Trade Mark No,
12550 in respect of the trade name Chhatrapati Shivaji registered in the Registry of Trade
Marks, Bombay.” This practice of selling bidis in the name of Shivaji was started by the
petitioner during 1928.

8
State of Uttar Pradesh v. Babu Ram, AIR 1961 SC 751.
9
PEC Ltd v. Austbulk Shipping Sdn. Bhd., AIR 2019 SC 105.
10
M/s. Sable Waghire & Company & Others v. Union of India & Others, AIR 1975 SC 1172.

13
The government of India in 1968 under the Emblems and Names Act, 1950 added the words
Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj in the schedule, to prevent the improper use of the name of
Shivaji Maharaj as per section 8 of the Act.

“The petitioners represented to the Government of India in the Commerce Department about
the hardship caused to them and requested for extension of time up to March 31, 1972, for
continuing to use the said Trade Marks. The Government allowed the petitioners time to use
the existing Trade Marks with the name and the pictorial representation of Chhatrapati
Shivaji till May 31. 1969.” Further the registrar of trade marks stated to the petitioner that,
“the use and registration of the name and the pictorial representation of Chhatrapati Shivaji
Maharaj is prohibited by virtue of Sections 3 and 4 of the impugned Act.”

As a result of which the petitioner filed this writ application challenging section 3, 4 and 8 of
the Emblems and Names Act, 1950. They also challenged the adding of the word Shivaji
Maharaj by the central government in the schedule. They further prayed that the order of the
registrar of trade marks shall be quashed.

The counsel for the petitioner stated before the court that, “The parliament was not competent
to make the law in question. The subject matter of the legislation relates to trade and
commerce and, therefore, falls squarely within entry No. 28 of List II of the Seventh
Schedule to the Constitution.” The respondent contended that, “the pith and substance of the
legislation as gathered from the preamble, the marginal note of Section 3 and the illustrations
furnished by the Schedule is the preservation of sanctity of the names and emblems of
international and national entities. Hence the residuary entry 97 of List I will be attracted. The
legislation is closer to entry No. 49 which deals with- Patents, inventions, designs, copyright,
trademarks and merchandise marks in List No. I of the Seventh Schedule.”

The counsel for the petitioner contended that, “Sections 3, 4 and 8 confer unguided and
arbitrary power on the Central Government the exercise of which is capable of leading to
discrimination and imposition of unreasonable restrictions on the fundamental rights of the
citizens under Articles 14 and 19 (1) (f) and (g) of the Constitution. There is no guideline in
the Act for exercise of power. There is, therefore, the vice of excessive delegation of
legislative power says counsel.”

The counsel of the petitioner also contended that, “no rules have been framed under Section 9
of the Act which make the same unworkable.”

14
Principle of interpretation reflected in this case-

There is one of the most important rules of interpretation as per which the statute must be
read as a whole and in its context. This rule was used by the court while deciding this writ
petition. The court in this case referred to the long title of the act, provisions contained ins
section 3 to 8, the schedule of the act and the statement of objects and reasons for the
enactment of this act while deciding on the question of constitutionality of the act. All these
elements of the act when read together give a clear sign that the name of Chhatrapati Shivaji
cannot be used in such manner as was done by the petitioner. The court also used the liberal
interpretation while deciding on the legislative competence of the parliament to enact the law.

Core issues in Question-

1. Whether the parliament was competent to enact the Emblems and Names Act, 1950.
2. Whether the provisions of section 3,4 and 8 of the Act were unconstitutional.
3. Whether there was any excessive delegation of power to the central government by
this statute.

Ratio of the Judgement-

Regarding the legislative competency the court after reading the statute as a whole stated that,
“In interpreting the entries in the Lists of the Seventh Schedule a broad and liberal approach
has been a well-settled rule of the Court. The subject matter of the legislation is also to be
gathered from the totality of the provisions of the Act read with the preamble and the
Schedule. So read it is clear that the Act does not concern itself directly or even substantially
with trade or commerce.” Hence, the first issue was decided in favour of the respondent.

The court regarding the constitutionality of the provisions of the act stated that, “National or
international significance gets attached to certain names or institutions over the years or ages
and then they belong to the nation or to all nations. As per the national consciousness,
therefore, forbids ordinary commercial use of the sacred name by individuals in their own
interest as opposed to national interest.”

Regarding the excessive delegation the court stated that, “the scheme disclosed in the
provisions of the Act read with the preamble, and the Objects and Reasons make it clear that
there was imperative necessity for regulating the use of certain emblems and names. The fact
that only improper use of the names and emblems is prohibited itself provides guidance.” The
further justifying the validity of section 8 of the act stated that, “It is not possible for the

15
Parliament to envisage the possibility of improper use of all names and emblems as time goes
on. Nor is it possible to enumerate in the Schedule an exhaustive list of all the names,
emblems and entities. Section 8. therefore, makes provision for empowering the Central
Government to add to or alter the Schedule.” After reading the statute as a whole it is very
clear that the there is sufficient guidance within the statute to enable the central government
use its power under section 8 of the Act.

Regarding the contention that section 3 and 4 violates certain provisions of article 19, the
court stated that, “The petitioners right to trade in bidis is not at all interfered with by the
legislation, Section 3 in terms provides for enabling the affected persons to adjust their
business or affairs inasmuch as the Central Government can permit some time to alter their
emblems, designs, etc. to carry on with their trade, In this case the petitioners on their own
application obtained an extension of time presumably under Section 3 of the Act and,
therefore, cannot complain. There is built-in safe guard in Section 3 itself for mitigating any
hardship to persons or any rigour of the law.” The nature of the provisions of the act are of
regulatory in nature and they only impose reasonable restrictions. The court used the literal
interpretation while analysing section 3 of the Act.

The court regarding the lack of rules framed under the act after reading the statute as a whole
stated that, “From the scheme and machinery of the Act there is nothing to indicate that
absence of rules will make the Act unworkable.”

Final Decision-

The court held that, the parliament was competent to enact the Emblems and Names Act,
1950. The provisions of section 3,4 and 8 of the Act were constitutional. There was not any
excessive delegation of power to the central government by this statute.

Satya Phaneendra v. SS.h.o, Kodad11

Brief Summary of Facts-

“A letter was written by the petitioner, enclosing therewith a tri-coloured cloth resembling the
National flag which is sold as handkerchief for a sum of Rs. 10 everywhere in Kodad and
other places in the district of Nalgonda.” The court treated this letter as a PIL. The cloth
resembled the national flag and, on that cloth, Mera Bharath Mahan and India had been
inscribed.
11
Satya Phaneendra v. SS.h.o, Kodad, AIR 2001 AP 247.

16
Principle of interpretation reflected in this case-

The court used principle of literal interpretation in the case. The interpretation of section 3 of
the Emblems Act was one of the main issues in this case. Section 3 of the act contains very
clear and unambiguous provision. Reading the section with the schedule of the act makes it
very clear that the use of national flag in such a manner is prohibited. The court interpreted
section 5 of the act and interpreted the use of word “shall” means the provision is mandatory
in nature. Section 5 of the act is a penal provision and in very clear manner, it provides
mandatory punishment for the contravention of the provisions of the act by making improper
use of names and emblems. So, the principles of literal interpretation and interpretation of
mandatory provisions have been used by the court while deciding the case.

Core issues in Question-

1. Whether the handkerchief which resembles the national flag offends the provisions of
the Emblems Act.

Ratio of the Judgement-

The court interpreting section 3 and 5 of the Emblems Act stated that, “Section 3 provides for
prohibition of improper use of certain emblems and names in a very clear manner. 5 of the
Emblems Act contains a penal provision as per which any person who contravenes the
provisions of Section 3 shall be punishable with fine which may extend to five hundred
rupees.” In the schedule of the act, national flag of India has also been mentioned as one of
the emblems of which no improper use shall be made off. The court stated that the use of
national flag is against the provision of section 2 of the National Honour act which deals with
insult to national flag and the constitution of India. The court also referred to the flag code of
India to show that how Indian flag should be honoured.

The court further observed that, “The provisions of the aforementioned Acts and the Flag
Code of India clearly state the reasons as to why the same had to be enacted by the
Parliament inasmuch as it is expected of every citizen of India to pay respect to the National
Flag, national anthem and the Constitution of India they deserve and any case involving
deliberate disrespect thereto must be seriously dealt with. The petitioner has done a great
service in bringing to the notice of this Court the misuse of the Indian National Flag in the
manner as has been done.”

Final Decision-

17
The court stated that, “handkerchief which resembles the national flag offends the provisions
of the Emblems Act.” The court further stated that the authorities in the district should have
taken all steps to prevent such misuse of the national flag. The court gave a direction to the
authorities and stated that, “we direct the State and in particular the District Collector and the
Superintendent of Police, Nalgonda district to take steps to conduct investigation with regard
to the misuse of the National Flag and see to it that the offenders are brought to book.”

Shri Raghunath International School v. State of Rajasthan12

Brief Summary of Facts-

There was an institution in the name of Shri Raghunath international school. The institution
never projected itself as a government institution and it never claimed any advantage by using
the word international. It was in existence since 2006. In 2013, the principal of the school
made an effort to upgradation up to 10th standard. The district education office orally
informed the representative of the institution that the request for upgradation cannot be
accepted without removing the word “international” from the name of the institution. The
upgradation request was not approved. Hence, this writ petition was filed before the court.

The counsel for the respondent stated that, “The prima facie use of word international in the
name of the institution is violative of the act of 1950.”

The counsel for the petitioner stated that, “By use of word international none of the
provisions contained under the Act of 1950 has been violated.”

Principle of interpretation reflected in this case-

The court in this case also used the principle of literal interpretation. The interpretation of
section 3 of the act was the main issue in this case. The language of the provision is very
clear. The word “international” in its ordinary and natural meaning does not show that it is
violative of the provisions of the act. No where it is specifically mentioned in the act that the
word “international” cannot be used in the name of one institution. The use of the word
“international” cannot be said be an improper use of names and emblems as envisaged under
the provisions of the Act.

Core issues in Question-

1. Whether the objection raised by the District Education office was sustainable.

12
Shri Raghunath International School v. State of Rajasthan, LQ/RajHC/2014/1508.

18
 2. Whether the name international violates the provisions of the Emblems Act, 1950.

Ratio of the Judgement-

The court made a literal interpretation and referring to the section 3 of the act stated that,
“Upon perusal of Section 3 of the Act of 1950, it is crystal clear that it envisages prohibition
of improper use of certain emblems and names. On a bare perusal of Section 3 in conjunction
with the Schedule ipso facto reveals that use of word- international is not prohibited under
Sec. 3 of the Act of 1950. Moreover, in the given circumstances, it cannot be said that by
using name international school the petitioner institution has violated Section 3 and can be
castigated for improper use of certain emblems and names.”

Final Decision-

The court held that, the objection raised by the education office regarding the name of the
institution is unsustainable. The name international does not violate the provisions of the
Emblems Act, 1950. The court further ordered that, “The petitioner institution is at liberty to
apply afresh before the competent authority for its upgradation within a period of 10 days
from the date of this order and on submission of the application it is expected from the
competent authority to process the application expeditiously preferably within a period of 30
days.”

South India Textiles and Others v. Government of Andhra Pradesh and Others13

Brief Summary of Facts-

The petitioner in this case was a partnership firm. They sought for the registration of their
firm under section 58 of the Partnership Act, 1932. They wanted their name to be “The South
India Textiles”. But the application for registration was returned by the registering authority
stating that, “The word India is prohibited under the provisions of Emblems and Names
(Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950.” After that they made a representation to the state
government and sought for permission to use the name “the south India textiles”. The state
government also rejected their representation. Then, the writ petition was filed before the HC.

Principle of interpretation reflected in this case-

The court in this case interpreted section 3 of the Act. Apart from section 3 of the act, the
court interpreted clause 7 of the schedule of the act. They used the principle of literal

13
South India Textiles and Others v. Government of Andhra Pradesh and Others, AIR 1989 AP 55.

19
interpretation in this case. As the words of both these provisions were clear and
unambiguous. Nowhere in the act, it is mentioned that the name “South India” cannot be used
by a firm as the name of the firm. When the interpretation of the provisions does not lead to
absurdity, then literal interpretation shall be used and this is the exact case here.

Core issues in Question-

1. Whether there was any improper use of the word “India” in the name of the firm.
2. Whether this use offend the provisions of the Emblems Act.

Ratio of the Judgement-

The court by referring to section 3 of the act stated that, “Notwithstanding anything contained
in any law whether the emblem or name purports to use for the purpose of any trade, business
or profession as specified in the schedule it shall not be used except with the previous
permission of the central government.” The court referred to clause 7 of the schedule and
stated that, “Any name which may suggest or be calculated to suggest the patronage of the
government of India or the government of state.”

The court gave by using literal interpretation of these provisions stated that, “The use of word
South India does not reflect upon any state government or the government of India nor
signifies any patronage. South India is not a state. It is a common name for many a firm or
proprietary concerns. By no stretch of imagination, it can be said that it is improper use
within the meaning of section 3 of the Emblems Act.”

Final Decision-

The court allowed the writ petition. The court quashed the rejection order given by the state
government. The court ordered the registration authority to register the name of the firm as
per section 58 of the Partnership Act. The court held that the use of word “South India” or
“India” does not offend the provisions of the Emblems Act, 1950.

Bharat Chamber, Ramanathapuram District v. The General Manager, District Industries

Centre, Ramnathapuram District and Others14

Brief Summary of Facts-

14
Bharat Chamber, Ramanathapuram District v. The General Manager, District Industries Centre,
Ramnathapuram District and Others, LQ/MadHC/2012/5679.

20
The petitioner in this case was a registered partnership firm. The name of the firm was
Bharath Chamber. The firm was registered as a dealer under Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax
and Central Sales tax. The tax department also gave an IFST waiver of Rs. 6,40,000
regarding the transactions made by the firm. In 2002, the Manger of district industries centre,
who was the respondent. passed an order stating that the petitioner’s firm was using the name
Bharath which is equivalent to India, and such name cannot be used by the partnership firm.
The concession given by the tax department was also cancelled by the respondents. These
orders were challenged in this writ petition. The counsel for the petitioner stated that, “There
is no bar for any citizen in carrying on business either as a partnership firm or otherwise in
using the term Bharath and mere use of Bharath cannot be said to be an offence under the
Emblems Act.”

Principle of interpretation reflected in this case-

The interpretation of section 3 of the Emblems Act and clause 7 of the schedule of the act in
question. As the language of both these provisions were crystal clear, the court used the
literal interpretation rule while deciding the case. Nowhere in the statute it was stated that no
firm can use the name “Bharath”. The word “Bharath” in its ordinary and natural meaning
does not suggest any patronage with government of India.

Core issues in Question-

1. Whether the order given by the respondent was correct.

2. Whether the name of the partnership firm offend the provisions of the Emblems Act.

Ratio of the Judgement-

The court referred to the case of South India Textile v. Government of AP 15 and stated that,
“It is clear that the use of emblem or name prohibited only in cases, where the intention is to
have a patronage by using the name of the Government of India or government of any state or
local authority for the commercial benefit of individual citizens. It is not even the case that
the petitioner’s using the name Bharath for the purpose of making patronage by using the
name of government of India. It is not known as to how the restriction imposed under section
3 read with schedule of the act, will apply to this case.” It is very evident that the court made
a literal interpretation of the statutory provisions.

15
South India Textiles and Others v. Government of Andhra Pradesh and Others, AIR 1989 AP 55.

21
The court further stated that the respondent had no authority to reject the concession granted
by the Tax department. This was stated by the court as excess use of power.

Final Decision-

The court allowed the writ petition. The court held that, the name of the partnership firm does
not offend the provisions of the Emblems Act. The court further held that, “the orders of the
respondent were contrary to law and without jurisdiction and they are liable to set aside.”

CONCLUSION-

The act was passed to prohibit the improper use of emblems and names for the commercial
benefits. After going through the act, it is very clear that there are no ambiguous words in the
act. The main provisions of the act like section 3,4, and 5 contain very clear provisions. The
penal provision of under the statute is a mandatory provision. The penal provision under the
act is given in clear and unambiguous form and is of mandatory nature. The courts have
utilised the literal and strict interpretation while deciding the cases under the Act. The courts
have also taken the help of statement of object and reasons while deciding the
constitutionality of some of the provisions of the act. This act is of great help in curbing the
improper use of names and emblems. But the fines imposed and penalty imposed under this
act should be increased by the government to for ensuring strict compliance with the
provisions of the act.

22
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS-

1. GP SINGH, PRINCIPLES OF STATUTORY INTERPRETATION, 15 th edition,

LexisNexis, 2021.

ARTICLES-

1. The Use and Misuse of Emblems and State Symbols, Wasim Beg, SCC Online, June
6, 2020, https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2020/06/06/the-use-and-misuse-of-
emblems-and-state-symbols/.

WEB SOURCES-

1. https://legislative.gov.in/
2. https://www.legitquest.com/

23