Of all the stupid judgments given by the Indian Supreme Court, the recent one on Gandhi and obscenity really takes the cake, and shows the low intellectual level of some of those sitting in the Supreme Court.
The judgment has introduced a new test to determine 'obscenity'---the 'historically respected persons' test.
But what if a person does not respect Gandhi, and believes, as I do, that he did great harm to India ( see my blogs on Gandhi ) ? Should he be jailed for committing the crime of obscenity ?
From paragraphs 76 to 90 the decision refers to other Supreme Court decisions eulogizing Gandhi. But how was that relevant ?
From paragraphs 95 to 99 the judgment discusses the theories of poetry, and refers to Samuel Johnson, Mill, Macaulay, Carlyle, Shelley, Hazlitt, Leigh Hunt, Coleridge, Emerson, Hegel, etc.Again, how was all this relevant ?
In paragraph 104 the judgment talks of a hypothetical plot where Gandhi, Tagore and Patel meet in heaven and display egoism, megalomania, etc. Again all meaningless and irrelevant.
The conclusion is in para 105, but despite my best effort I could not make head or tail out of it. Perhaps, it was meant to be like the Biblical ' peace of God that passeth all understanding '.