This is an excerpt from the judgment of Supreme Court
The prejudice against Urdu stems from the misconception that Urdu is alien to India. This opinion, we are afraid, is incorrect as Urdu, like Marathi and Hindi, is an Indo-Aryan language. It is a language which was born in this land. Urdu developed and flourished in India due to the need for people belonging to different cultural milieus who wanted to exchange ideas and communicate amongst themselves. Over the centuries, it attained ever greater refinement and became the language of choice for many acclaimed poets.
The debate surrounding languages is not new. In fact, it started even before independence, and the need for greater use of Indian languages was also recognized during the independence movement. It was accepted by a large number of Indians that the language which is a product of amalgamation of various Indian languages such as Hindi, Urdu and Punjabi, is what is known as ‘Hindustani’, which a large mass of this country speaks.
In its Cocanada (Kakinada) Session of 1923, the Indian National Congress recognized amendments to its Constitution to the effect that the Congress would use Hindustani, English or provincial languages in its proceedings. The relevant portion of the resolution reads as follows:
“Article XXXIII The proceedings of the Congress shall be conducted, as far as possible, in Hindustani, English or the language of the province may also be used.”[1]
In the same Session, it was recognized that the lack of cooperation between different communities due to mutual suspicion about each other’s aims and intentions is one of the obstacles to attainment of Swaraj in India. To overcome these difficulties, different communities, through their representatives, signed the Indian National Pact resolving that Swaraj is the aim of all the communities. This Pact recognized Hindustani as the national language of India. The relevant portion of the said Pact reads as under:
“(3) Hindustani shall be the national language of India. It shall be permissible to write it in either script, Urdu or Deonagari.”[2]
The Congress Constitution of 1934 contained a provision which said that all proceedings of the Congress shall be in Hindustani and much like the present Indian Constitution, the Congress Constitution also carved out a proviso which provided for the use of English or any provincial language, in case a speaker is unable to speak in Hindustani or the Congress President permits him/her to do so. Article XVII of this Congress Constitution thus came to read as under:
“Article XVII LANGUAGE
(a)The proceedings of the Congress, the All-India Congress Committee and the Working Committee shall ordinarily be conducted in Hindustani; the English language or any provincial language may be used if the speaker is unable to speak in Hindustani or whenever permitted by the President.
(b)The proceedings of the Provincial Congress Committees shall ordinarily be conducted in the language of the province concerned. Hindustani may also be used.”[3]
This resolve is also reflected in an essay authored by the first Prime Minister of the country, Jawaharlal Nehru, where he wrote as follows: “Language is alleged to divide India into innumerable compartments; we are told by the census that there are 222 languages or dialects in India. I suppose the census of the United States mentions a very large number of languages; the German census, I think, mentions over sixty. But most of these languages are spoken by small groups of people, or are dialects. In India, the absence of mass education has fostered the growth of dialects. As a matter of fact, India is a singularly unified area so far as languages are concerned. Altogether in the vast area of India, there are a dozen languages and these are closely allied to each other. They fall into two groups— the Indo-Aryan languages of the north and center and west, and the Dravidian languages of the east and south.
The Indo-Aryan languages derived from Sanskrit and anyone who knows one of them finds it easy to learn another. The Dravidian languages are different, but each one of them contains fifty per cent, or more words from the Sanskrit. The dominant language in India is: Hindustani (Hindi or Urdu) which is already spoken by a huge block of a hundred and twenty million people and is partly understood by scores of millions of others. This language is bound to become the all-India medium of communication, not displacing the great provincial languages, but as a compulsory second language. With mass education on behalf of the state this will not be difficult. Already due to talkies and the radio, the range of Hindustani is spreading fast.
The writer of this article has had occasion to address great mass audiences all over India and almost always, except in the south, he has used Hindustani and been understood. However numerous the difficult problems which India has to solve, the language problem clearly is not one of them. It already is well on the way to solution.”[4]
Nehru acknowledged that Hindustani is bound to become the all-India medium of communication, since it is spoken by a large number of people in the country. At the same time, he recognized the importance of provincial languages by emphasizing that the intention was not to replace provincial languages with Hindustani. Thus, he put forward the idea of Hindustani as a compulsory second language.
Based on the developments recounted above, it is clear that the country was moving forward to accept Hindustani as its National language during our struggle for independence. Even the Constituent Assembly’s Rules of Procedure laid down that the business of the Assembly would be transacted in Hindustani, or English. Again, a proviso similar to the one contained in our present Constitution[5] was incorporated, stating that in cases where a member is unable to express himself/herself in Hindustani or English, he/she may, with the permission of the President, speak in their mother tongue[6].
Why was it then that Hindustani was not recognized as an official language of the Union? It is now clear that the main reason behind this was the partition of the nation in 1947 and adoption of Urdu by Pakistan as its National language. The ultimate victim was Hindustani.
Granville Austin explains in detail the discussions on the language issue in India before the Constituent Assembly in particular, and in the country in general, before and after partition. It is Chapter 12 of his first book[7] which throws considerable light on this contentious and delicate national issue. It was a pragmatic hope nurtured by our national leaders in post-independent India and by the majority of the members of the Constituent Assembly that Hindustani had a very bright prospect of becoming the national language.
The early debates in the Constituent Assembly indicated a compromise on this issue between the hardliners from both sides i.e. between supporters of Sanskritized Hindi and proponents of liberal mixture of Urdu and Hindi known as ‘Hindustani’. But then comes a strong rupture in the form of the partition of India, and amongst its several fallouts, one vital blow was given to Urdu and Hindustani both. This is what Granville Austin has to say here:
“…Partition killed Hindustani and endangered the position of English and the provincial languages in the Constitution. ‘If there had been no Partition, Hindustani would without doubt have been the national language,’ K. Santhanam believed, ‘but the anger against the Muslims turned against Urdu. Assembly members ‘felt that the Muslims having caused the division of the country, the whole issue of national language must be reviewed afresh’, said an article in The Hindustan Times. Having seen the dream of unity shattered by Partition, by the ‘treachery’ of the Urdu (Hindustani) speakers, the Hindi extremists became even more firmly committed to Hindi and to achieving national unity through it. Speakers of the provincial languages must learn Hindi and the regional languages must take second place, the Hindi-wallahs believed. And as to 27 English, it should go as Urdu had gone. Were not both un-Indian?”[8]
Be that as it may, it is a fact now that Hindustani is not the official language under the Constitution. Under Article 343 of the Constitution, Hindi is the official language, while the use of English was made permissible for official purposes for a period of fifteen years. But this does not mean that Hindustan and Urdu have become extinct. This was never the intention of the framers of the Constitution. In a speech to the Constituent Assembly on the language issue, Jawaharlal Nehru emphasized that the official language i.e. Hindi shall be enriched by borrowing the vocabulary from Urdu. His exact words were: “…We find that in a particular subject or type of subjects we speak better in Hindi than in Urdu and in another type of subjects Urdu suits us better; it suits the genius of that subject a little better. My point is that I was both these instruments which strengthen Hindi that is going to be developed as our official and National language of the country. Let us keep in touch with the people…”11. 28 This spirit is embodied in Article 351 of the Constitution, which reads as follows: “351. Directive for development of the Hindi language It shall be the duty of the Union to promote the spread of the Hindi language, to develop it so that it may serve as a medium of expression for all the elements of the composite culture of India and to secure its enrichment by assimilating without interfering with its genius, the forms, style and expressions used in Hindustani and in the other languages of India specified in the Eighth Schedule, and by drawing, wherever necessary or desirable, for its vocabulary, primarily on Sanskrit and secondarily on other languages.”
Both Gandhi and Nehru were great proponents of Hindustani. Only a few months before his death Gandhi wrote: “This Hindustani (Gandhi wrote) should be neither Sanskritized Hindi nor Persianised Urdu but a happy combination of both. It should also freely admit words wherever necessary from the different regional languages and also assimilate words from foreign languages, provided that they can mix well and easily with our national language. Thus our national language must develop into a rich and powerful instrument capable of expressing the whole gamut of human thoughts and feelings. To confine oneself exclusively to Hindi or Urdu would be a crime 29 against intelligence and the spirit of patriotism.”[9]
Even today, the language used by the common people of the country is replete with words of the Urdu language, even if one is not aware of it. It would not be incorrect to say that one cannot have a day-to-day conversation in Hindi without using words of Urdu or words derived from Urdu. The word ‘Hindi’ itself comes from the Persian word ‘Hindavi’! This exchange of vocabulary flows both ways because Urdu also has many words borrowed from other Indian languages, including Sanskrit.
Interestingly, Urdu words have a heavy influence on Court parlance, both in criminal and civil law. From Adalat to halafnama to peshi, the influence of Urdu is writ large in the language of the Indian Courts. For that matter, even though the official language of the Supreme Court and the High Courts as per Article 348 of the Constitution is English, yet many Urdu words continue to be used in this Court till date. These include vakalatnama, dasti, etc.
Viewed from another perspective, the Urdu language has come to be adopted by many States and Union Territories in India as the second official language in exercise of powers conferred by Article 345 of the Constitution. The States which have Urdu as one of the official languages are Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand, Telangana, Uttar Pradesh, and West Bengal, while the Union Territories which follow this practice are Delhi and Jammu and Kashmir.
Even from a Constitutional perspective, the use of language for official purposes is not according to any rigid formula. For example, Article 120 of the Constitution prescribes Hindi or English as the official language of Parliament, but the proviso to the said Article empowers the Presiding Officer of the House to allow a member to express themselves in their mother tongue, if they do not know Hindi or English. The same principle applies to State legislatures vide Article 210 of the Constitution.
It may also be of same interest to know that when we criticize Urdu, we are in a way also criticizing Hindi, as according to linguists and literary scholars, Urdu and Hindi are not two 16 Please refer to the previous paragraphs of this judgment. languages, but it is one language. True, Urdu is mainly written in Nastaliq and Hindi in Devnagri; but then scripts do not make a language. What makes languages distinct is their syntax, their grammar and their phonology. Urdu and Hindi have broad similarities in all these counts. The noted Urdu scholar Gyan Chand Jain, in Urdu, Hindi ya Hindustani published in magazine Hindustani Zaban (Jan-April 1974), writes:
“It is absolutely clear that Urdu and Hindi are not two separate languages. To call them two languages is to belie all principles of linguistics and to deceive oneself and others….Even though Urdu literature and Hindi literature are two different and independent literatures, Urdu and Hindi are not two different languages…Enumerating Urdu and Hindi as two languages, in the Indian Constitution, is political expediency, not a linguistic reality”
Professor Gyan Chand Jain does take into consideration the fact that in our Constitution, Urdu and Hindi are mentioned as two different languages, but that the author says, “is political expediency, not a linguistic reality.” According to Amrit Rai, “…their recognition as two separate languages under the Constitution need not deter linguists from questioning the scientific validity of their separation”[10]
The noted Hindi scholar Ram Vilas Sharma, who is a strong supporter of Hindi as a national language, in his book Bharat ki Bhasha Samasya writes: “Hindi-Urdu are not two separate languages; they are basically one and the same. Their pronouns, verbs, and basic vocabulary are the same. There are no two other languages in the world whose pronouns and verbs are one hundred per cent the same. Russian and Ukrainian are much akin to each other but even they are not so closely alike.”
Another outstanding Urdu scholar, and a leader of the Urdu movement, Abdul Haq, in his book Qadim Urdu says: “It is a clear fact and needs no further adumbration that the language we speak and write and call by the name ‘Urdu’ today is derived from Hindi and constituted of Hindi”
If there are dissimilarities, there are plenty between Hindi and high Hindi, like there are between Urdu and high Urdu. But close similarities exist between Hindi and Urdu, when these are spoken day-to-day. We fall back again on Gyan Chand Jain, who writes:
“…It is a fact that the difference between average Urdu writing and average Hindi writing is not as great as the difference between average Urdu and difficult Urdu, or that between average Hindi and difficult Hindi. In the literature of every language, be it Urdu or Hindi or English, one finds different levels of language according to the stock of words used[1]on the one hand, the altogether simple language of everyday speech, and on the other a language difficult to comprehend, weighed down by words from the classical language or from an alien language…”[11]
This is not an occasion to have an elaborate discussion on the rise and fall of Urdu, but this much can be stated that this fusion of the two languages Hindi and Urdu met a roadblock in the form of the puritans on both sides and Hindi became more Sanskritized and Urdu more Persian. A schism exploited by the colonial powers in dividing the two languages on religion. Hindi was now understood to be the language of Hindus and Urdu of the Muslims, which is such a pitiable. However, our source for the extract is digression from reality; from unity in diversity; and the concept of universal brotherhood.
Coming to the present case, it must be stated that a Municipal Council is there to provide services to the local community of the area and cater to their immediate day-to-day needs. If people or a group of people, residing within the area covered by the Municipal Council are familiar with Urdu, then there should not be any objection if Urdu is used in addition to the official language i.e. Marathi, at least on the signboard of the Municipal Council. Language is a medium for exchange of ideas that brings people holding diverse views and beliefs closer and it should not become a cause of their division.
And these are the words of our former Chief Justice of India, M. N. Venkatachaliah, who makes a fervent plea for the preservation of Urdu, while speaking in a seminar in Delhi: “The Urdu language has a special place in India. The Urdu language conjures up and inspires deeply emotive sentiments and thoughts from the sublimity of the mystic to the romantic and the earthy, of perfumes of camaraderie, of music and life’s wistfulness and a whole range of human relationships. Its rich literature and lore is a treasure house of the noblest thoughts on life’s mysteries. Urdu is not simply one of the languages of this country. It is a culture and civilisation in itself…But today this great culture needs urgent measures for its very survival…The richness of Urdu culture needs to be restored to its pristine glory.”[12]
Our misconceptions, perhaps even our prejudices against a language have to be courageously and truthfully tested against the reality, which is this great diversity of our nation: Our strength can never be our weakness. Let us make friends with Urdu and every language. If Urdu was to speak for herself, she would say:
“urdu hai mirā naam maiñ ‘Khusrav’ kī pahelī
kyuuñ mujh ko banāte ho ta.assub kā nishāna
maiñ ne to kabhī ḳhud ko musalmāñ nahīñ maanā
dekhā thā kabhī maiñ ne bhī ḳhushiyoñ kā zamāna
apne hī vatan meñ huuñ magar aaj akelī
urdu hai mirā naam maiñ ‘Khusrav’ kī pahelī” [13]
Urdu is my name, I am the riddle of ‘Khusrav’ Do not hold me for your prejudices I never considered myself a Muslim I too have seen happier times I feel like an outsider in my homeland today Urdu is my name, I am the riddle of ‘Khusrav’
The display of an additional language cannot, by itself, be said to be in violation of the provisions of the 2022 Act. The High Court while reaching the above findings had considered the relevant provisions of law. We completely agree with the reasoning given by the High Court that there is no prohibition on the use of Urdu under the 2022 Act or in any provision of law. The entire case of the appellant to our mind is based on a misconception of law.
Source
Varshatai v State of Maharashtra (2025)
[1] A.M ZAIDI, THE ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF INDIAN NATIONAL CONGRESS-VOL-8: 1921-1924: INDIA AT THE CROSS-ROADS at p. 635
[2] THE INDIAN NATIONAL PACT, CLAUSE 3.
[3] A.M ZAIDI, THE ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF INDIAN NATIONAL CONGRESS-VOL-10: 1930-1935: THE BATTLE FOR SWARAJ at p. 442
[4] Jawaharlal Nehru, The Unity of India, Foreign Affairs, Volume 16, No. 2 (Jan. 1938), pp.
231-243
[5] See Articles 120 and 210 of the Constitution of India
[6] GRANVILLE AUSTIN, THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION: CORNERSTONE OF A NATION, Oxford University Press (New Delhi; 2000) at p. 274
[7] GRANVILLE AUSTIN, THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION: CORNERSTONE OF A NATION, Oxford University Press (New Delhi; 2000)
[8] GRANVILLE AUSTIN, THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION: CORNERSTONE OF A NATION, Oxford University Press (New Delhi; 2000) at pp. 277-278. 11 Constituent Assembly Debates, Vol IX at p. 1415
[9] GRANVILLE AUSTIN, THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION: CORNERSTONE OF A NATION, Oxford University Press (New Delhi; 2000) at p. 272
[10] AMRIT RAI, A HOUSE DIVIDED: THE ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF HINDI/HINDAVI, Oxford University Press (1984) at p. 3.
[11] Gyan Chand Jain, Urdu Hindi ya Hindustani, Hindustani Zaban (Jan-April, 1974)
[12] See Danial Latifi, Urdu in UP, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 36, No.7 (Feb 17-23,
2001), pp. 533-535 at p. 535.
[13] Extract from a Nazm by poet Iqbal Ashhar