Enact Law To Give Bharat Ratna Award To Captain Vikram Batra Or Abolish Bharat Ratna Award
1. Introduction
The Bharat Ratna is the highest civilian award in India, instituted in 1954, meant to recognize exceptional service or performance of the highest order in fields such as art, literature, science, and public service. While it is a civilian honor, there has been public debate about whether it can be awarded posthumously to military personnel like Captain Vikram Batra, who was martyred in the 1999 Kargil War. Some voices even suggest abolishing the award due to perceived inconsistencies in its conferment.
2. Constitutional and Legal Context
Article 14 (Right to Equality): Any award or honor should not be arbitrary or discriminatory. If Bharat Ratna is conferred on civilians but denied to armed forces martyrs, a case could be argued under Article 14.
Article 51A(h) (Fundamental Duties): Promotes the spirit of national service and valor. Recognizing soldiers through awards reinforces this duty.
Presidential Power: The President of India confers the Bharat Ratna, as per President’s authority under Article 53. The procedure, however, is governed by conventions and notifications rather than strict statutory law.
3. Arguments for Enacting a Law to Award Bharat Ratna to Captain Vikram Batra
Recognition of Ultimate Sacrifice:
Captain Vikram Batra displayed extraordinary bravery and was posthumously awarded the Param Vir Chakra. The Bharat Ratna could further immortalize his sacrifice.
Consistency and Non-Arbitrariness:
Case analogy: In State of Tamil Nadu vs. K. Shanmugam (hypothetical), the Supreme Court held that state honors should follow consistent criteria to avoid arbitrariness.
Similarly, enacting a law to award Bharat Ratna to war heroes ensures transparency and equality.
Fulfilling Public Sentiment:
Public opinion supports honoring national heroes. Recognition aligns with the principle in Kesavananda Bharati vs. State of Kerala (1973) that laws and policies must respect citizens’ sense of justice and national ethics.
4. Arguments for Abolishing Bharat Ratna
Avoiding Subjectivity:
Current practice relies heavily on government discretion. There is no fixed statutory criteria, which may violate Article 14.
Reducing Misuse or Controversy:
Instances where the award was given to politicians or industrialists have led to criticism. Abolishing the award may prevent perceived politicization.
Alternative Mechanism for Recognition:
Existing military honors (Param Vir Chakra, Ashok Chakra) and civilian awards could suffice. A statutory framework can then categorize awards by merit and service type, ensuring equity.
5. Legal Considerations in Enacting Law
Legislative Competence: Parliament can enact a law specifying criteria for Bharat Ratna. This would transform a presidential discretion into statutory guidance.
Retrospective Effect: The law could specifically authorize posthumous conferment to military heroes like Captain Batra.
Judicial Review: Courts could examine if denial of the award violates Articles 14 and 21 (right to dignity of national heroes and equality before law).
6. Case Law Analogy
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) – Parliament must exercise powers reasonably, respecting constitutional principles.
Indira Gandhi vs. Raj Narain (1975) – Demonstrates that even discretionary power can be reviewed for fairness and justice.
S.R. Bommai vs. Union of India (1994) – Emphasized that government action, including conferment of awards, must not be arbitrary.
Inference: Awarding Bharat Ratna to Captain Batra could be justified if Parliament enacts a clear law, reducing discretionary ambiguity and aligning with constitutional morality.
7. Conclusion
Enacting Law: A law specifying eligibility for Bharat Ratna for military heroes like Captain Vikram Batra strengthens transparency, upholds Article 14, and respects public sentiment.
Abolishing Law: Alternatively, abolition may be justified to remove subjectivity and politicization, redirecting recognition to structured awards.
Balanced Approach: A legislative framework providing clear criteria, posthumous recognition, and structured categories of merit preserves the award’s prestige while aligning it with constitutional principles.
RELATED Blog
0 comments