Read what Supreme Court said on India vs Bharat controversy

In 2016, the Supreme Court of India dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) that sought to make 'Bharat' the official name of the country alongside 'India.' The court's decision emphasized that citizens were free to use either term as they wished, highlighting the matter's insignificance.

A bench consisting of Chief Justice TS Thakur and Justice UU Lalit, both retired now, had dismissed the PIL filed by Niranjan Bhatwal from Maharashtra. The court's observations during the dismissal were clear: citizens had the liberty to refer to their nation as 'India' or 'Bharat,' and there was no need for legal intervention in this matter.

The Supreme Court had also expressed strong disapproval of the petitioner's stance, reminding him that Public Interest Litigations (PILs) were intended to serve the interests of the underprivileged and marginalized. 

Additionally, the petition asked that all NGOs and businesses use the term "Bharat" for both official and unofficial purposes.The petitioner argued that prominent suggestions during the Constituent Assembly's deliberations for the country's name included 'Bharat,' 'Hindustan,' 'Hind,' 'Bharatbhumi,' and 'Bharatvarsh,' among others.

Despite this PIL, the Supreme Court upheld the freedom of citizens to choose between 'Bharat' and 'India' when referring to their nation. The recent debate over the G20 dinner invitation, which used 'President of Bharat,' has reignited discussions about the country's name.