A former IAS officer has approached the Supreme Court challenging the Centre's January 28 and July 9, 2026 orders prescribing a six-stanza version of 'Vande Mataram' for singing and playing on specified occasions, Live Law reported. The petitioner, Balakrishnan Sathyabhama Mavoji of Kerala, contends in his petition that installing the six-stanza version amounts to an attempt to convert India into a sectarian theistic state — a contention the petition makes, not a finding of the court. LawBeat's report on the same petition likewise records his challenge to the two Home Ministry orders.

Source: Live Law — National Song Replaced With 'Religious War Song' From Anandamath: Ex-IAS Officer's Plea In Supreme Court (Oct 23, 2026)

Mavoji, who describes himself as a Hindu belonging to a Scheduled Caste community and has filed the petition as chairman of the Anupathika Prathinidhya Prakshobha Samithi (APPS), argues that he does not profess the Vaishnavite or Saktheya practices referred to in the six-stanza composition and that compulsory singing would compel obeisance to deities he does not accept, Live Law reported. He argues the orders replace the two-stanza version used as the National Song since Independence with the six-stanza composition contained in Bankim Chandra Chatterjee's novel Anandamath.

Source: LawBeat — Six-Stanza Vande Mataram Challenged In Supreme Court; Ex-IAS Officer Says MHA Orders Turn 'Secular Republic' Into 'Theocracy' (Oct 23, 2026)

6stanzas in the version prescribed by the challenged 2026 orders, per the petition
2stanzas in the version the petitioner says has been used since Independence
62724 / 2026Supreme Court diary number of the case, per Live Law

What the petition seeks

The petition seeks a writ of certiorari quashing the January 28 and July 9 orders, a mandamus restraining the Centre from compelling the six-stanza version at state, ceremonial, governmental or educational occasions, and a declaration that the two-stanza version alone be recognised as the National Song and that no citizen be penalised for abstaining, Live Law reported. It challenges the orders under Articles 14, 19(1)(a) and (b), 21, 25(1) and 28(3), among others, and invokes the Tagore formula — accepted by the Congress Working Committee in 1937 — of retaining only the first two stanzas.

Live Law noted that earlier, while hearing a similar petition by Carnatic musician TM Krishna, the Supreme Court had orally said that persons who refrain from singing the song for religious or other reasons should not be penalised, and that a Buddhist Scheduled Caste leader had also previously approached the court with a similar plea. No hearing outcome or Centre response to Mavoji's petition was reported in either account.

What is solid

  • A petition by former IAS officer Balakrishnan Sathyabhama Mavoji challenging the January 28 and July 9, 2026 orders has been filed in the Supreme Court, diary number 62724/2026 — reported by Live Law and LawBeat
  • The petition seeks quashing of the two orders and a bar on compelling the six-stanza version — Live Law

What is only claimed

  • All characterisations of the six-stanza version — including 'religious war song' and claims about communal division — are the petitioner's allegations in his filing, not court findings; the Centre's response has not been reported and the court has not ruled