IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13769 of 2011 Arun Kumar Sahu Son of Late Shital Prasad Sahu, resident of Village Chatti Road Begusarai, Ward no.36 (New), Begusarai Nagar Nigam, Police Station Begusari (Town), District Begusarai ............Petitioner Versus 1. The Union of India through the Secretary, Parliamentary Affairs, Parliament Bhawan, New Delhi 2. The Secretary Parliamentary Affairs, Parliament Bhawan, Govt. of India, New Delhi 3. The Secretary of Home Affairs,Govt. of India 4. The Indian National Congress Party through its President, 24 akbar Road, New Delhi 5. The President, the Indian National Congress, 24 Akbar Road, New Delhi ............. Respondents ----------- 02- 23/8/2011 Heard Mr. Shyam Nandan Choudhary for the petitioner, and Mr. Santosh Kumar Singh for respondent nos. 1 to 3. 2. The prayer made in this writ petition which has been filed by way of a Public Interest Litigation, is to restrain the use of tri-colour of the Indian national flag by respondent no.4 which is also a national political party. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to similarity in the national flag and the flag of respondent no.4, there are chances of misuse of the national flag resulting in dishonour and disregard being shown to it. He submits that to safeguard the honour of the national flag, respondent no.4 be directed to change its party flag so that it does not have resemblance with the national flag. 2 4. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we feel that there cannot be any dispute on the point that the national flag deserves all the respect and the honour attached to it, and every effort should be made to maintain that position. However, in the instant case, it is a fact that the national flag including its colour and the design with minor changes was adopted from the party flag of respondent no.4, and the party was allowed to continue till date with the basic flag subject to minor changes. There was no major complaint of any misuse warranting interference specially from the court. It is well settled that the court will not pass an order only on presumption and assumption based on perceived violation or misuse of a particular law. In the circumstances, we do not find any justifiable ground to interfere in the matter as desired by the writ petitioner. At best he may have a forum which may not be courts of law. 5. With the aforementioned observations, the writ petition stands dismissed. ( S K Katriar, J. ) ( Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) mrl 3