On the one hand Supreme Court has made it mandatory for playing national anthem before the screening of films in cinema halls on the other hand the apex court refused to entertain a plea of a BJP leader and lawyer seeking playing of national anthem in all courts before the start of proceedings. The ironically and diametrically opposite order has made the issue controversial and apprehensions are that the implementation of the order in letter and spirit would be impossible to judge in public places. The apex court decision was a judicial legislation that went much beyond the constitutional mandate. This ruling appears to overlook law settled in this regard by the Supreme Court in the Bijoe Emmanuel case. The court appears to have entered the realm of judicial legislation and gone much beyond constitutional mandate. The question is “How can the court compel a cinema theatre to play the national anthem? Can the cinema hall owners be hauled up for disrespecting the national anthem if some of the patrons did not stand up when it was being played? These questions remain unaddressed and who is going to address and redress such issues. Won’t such rulings hit the fundamental rights of an individual to practice and profess any religion. Isn’t it imposing of constitutional patriotism? The Supreme Court should not overreach as there will be many people who profess a religion that might prohibit them to bow when the national anthem is sung even though they would be showing utmost respect to the anthem. Screening national anthem in the cinema theatres is a good idea which will lead to imbibing a sense of patriotism and loyalty to the country. But, what if some people inside the theatre don’t stand up when the national anthem is played? It will be extremely difficult for the cinema owners to enforce this order. When the order of banning smoking in public places was passed skeptics had voiced similar sentiments but later it was found to be effective. Similarly this ban will also work and the critics would go on doubting it.