I would not agree with Gen.V.K. Singh if he meant that all media people are ' presstitutes '. There are some very upright media persons I know,e.g. P.Sainath. But, these are exceptions. The vast majority of mediapersons would certainly fall in the category mentioned by Gen. Singh, as my experience in the Press Council taught me. What else do paid news, Radia tapes, etc denote ?
Thursday, 9 April 2015
Fake Encounters
20 woodcutters were gunned down by the Andhra Pradesh police in the Sheshachalam forest of Chittoor district of Andhra Pradesh. Human rights activists allege that it was a case of fake 'encounter' killing by the police. The incident must be thoroughly investigated by an independent agency, and those found prima facie responsible, including senior police officers, tried, and if found guilty, sentenced to death.
In Prakash Kadam vs. Ramprasad Vishwanath Gupta ( 2011 ) a bench of the Supreme Court consisting of myself and Justice Gyan Sudha Mishra held :
" We are of the view that in cases where a fake encounter is proved against policemen in a trial, they must be given death sentence, treating it as the rarest of rare cases. Fake `encounters' are nothing but cold blooded, brutal murder by persons who are supposed to uphold the law. In our opinion if crimes are committed by ordinary people, ordinary punishment should be given, but if the offence is committed by policemen much harsher punishment should be given to them because they do an act totally contrary to their duties.
We warn policemen that they will not be excused for committing murder in the name of `encounter' on the pretext that they were carrying out the orders of their superior officers or politicians, however high.
In the Nuremburg trials the Nazi war criminals took the plea that `orders are orders', nevertheless they were hanged. If a policeman is given an illegal order by any superior to do a fake `encounter', it is his duty to refuse to carry out such illegal order, otherwise he will be charged for murder, and if found guilty sentenced to death. The `encounter' philosophy is a criminal philosophy, and all policemen must know this. Trigger happy policemen who think they can kill people in the name of `encounter' and get away with it should know that the gallows await them.
Wednesday, 8 April 2015
Condemned undefended and unheard
I was condemned by both Houses of Parliament for my statements on Gandhi and Subhas Chandra Bose, without giving me a hearing and an opportunity to defend myself. The rules of natural justice, and elementary decency, require that no one should be condemned unheard.. But I suppose that I did not deserve even that.
I am presently in America, and was here when I came to know of the resolutions against me. So I sent emails to three of the top lawyers of India, who are practising in the Supreme Court, requesting them to file writ petitions in the Supreme Court on my behalf, challenging these resolutions on the ground that they violate my fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19(1)(a) and 21 of the Constitution.
They violate Article 14 because it has been held by the Supreme Court in Maneka Gandhi vs.Union of India,A.I.R. 1978 S.C.597 that violation of natural justice is violation of Article 14. They violate Article 19(1)(a) because that provision gives me freedom of speech. And they violate Article 21 because Article 21 has been interpreted by the Supreme Court to include the right to one's reputation.
The first of these three lawyers ( I am not disclosing their names ) sent this reply to me :
" I am sorry I cannot file this case as I am strongly of the view that you were totally wrong in saying what you said about Mahatma Gandhi. He rightly felt that Indians could not fight the mighty British through armed revolutionaries as they could be easily crushed by the British Army.He therefore developed the novel technique of Satyagraha which would by its force create a world opinion in favour of Indian independence.I have never accepted to argue a case in which my client was morally very wrong.Though I have always held you in high esteem as a crusader against corruption I am sorry I shall not be able to help you in this case. ".
The second lawyer replied by refusing my request without giving any reason. The third did not even reply to my email. There was a fourth top lawyer of India whom i did not approach as he had already condemned me by tweeting against me on the issue.
I then decided that since lawyers seemed to be unwilling to defend me, I should defend myself, and seek a post decisional hearing from Parliament. So I obtained the email ids of the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha, Mr. Hamid Ansari, and the Speaker of the Lok Sabha, Ms. Sumitra Mahajan, and sent them emails requesting for a hearing by both Houses. Neither Mr. Ansari nor Ms.Mahajan showed me the courtesy of a reply.
Will no one defend me ? And will I not even be allowed to defend myself ?
Tuesday, 7 April 2015
Seeking Publicity
I have often been accused of saying sensational and outrageous things to get publicity for myself.
I deny this charge, and wish to say the following in my defence :
1. I have a low opinion of those who seek popularity or publicity for themselves. Most of the truly great people, who are my heroes, never sought popularity or publicity for themselves. Did Isaac Newton seek publicity when he wrote and published ' Principia Mathematica ' ? In fact for almost 20 years he did not publish his ideas, until persuaded by Edmond Hailey. Did Charles Darwin seek publicity ? He delayed publication of ' The Origin of the Species ', as he was not totally sure of his conclusions. Did Aryabhatta, Sushruta, Panini, or Ramanujan seek publicity or popularity ? Did George Washinton or Abraham Lincoln seek publicity ? Did Ashoka or Akbar seek publicity for themselves ? Yes, Ashoka sought publicity of his ideas through his Edicts, but that was not for himself but for the welfare of the people
I am nothing compared to these great men. But I believe that the truly great people are wholly or largely indifferent to popularity or publicity for themselves.
2. I have no desire to be sensational or outrageous. Whatever I say is always backed up by reasons. But often my statements do sound sensational because they strike at false convictions among the people which were due to false propaganda over long periods.
For instance, my statement that Gandhi was objectively a British agent ( see my post 'Gandhi-- a British agent ') shocked most people because they had been fed for almost a century on the false propaganda in favour of Gandhi.
Similarly, my statement that there was nothing wrong in eating beef ( most of the world eats it ) shocked most Hindus, as they had been fed for centuries on the false propaganda that the cow is a mother, when in fact it is only an animal.
I have no desire to be sensational or outrageous. But I have an intense desire to be rational, and it is my strong conviction that to progress Indians must develop rational and scientific thinking.
3. I am not in politics, nor do I have any intention of joining it. So for what will I seek publicity or popularity ? Yes, I seek publicity of my ideas, not for any personal gain, but for the upliftment of my people, who are today in a terrible condition
One Consequence of the Ban
See one consequence of the ban. Many people in India do not think rationally but emotionally.India will never progress unless people start thinking rationally. Saying that cow is a mother is nonsense and humbug . How can an animal be a mother of a human being ?
I have eaten beef, and will again eat it when the occasion arises. Ordinarily I do not eat it out of respect for the feelings of my wife and other relatives, who are mostly conservative Hindus, but I see nothing wrong in eating beef. Most of the world eats beef. Are they all sinners ?
Though an atheist, I am a stauncher Hindu than these feudal minded idiots who abused me. I have deeply studied Hindu philosophy and Sanskrit texts, and am very conversant with the great Hindu intellectualism, and indeed am a part of it and have contributed to it ( See my article ' Sanskrit as a language of Science' online and on my blog justicekatju.blogspot.in and my book on Mimansa ).My critics probably know nothing of the great Hindu intellectualism, and know only how to utter filthy abuses
Monday, 6 April 2015
Totally focused
I am totally focused, like Arjuna seeing only the eye of the revolving fish on the roof, and that too by its reflection in water in a basin in the swayamvar hall.
That eye for me is the vision of my country prosperous, with its people happy and living in harmony and enjoying a high standard of living. All the time I think only of this, and the remaining years of my life will be devoted to this single end.
I knew all along when I set out on this solitary,self created path half a century ago that the journey would be full of thorns and terrible obstacles. That I have survived so far is itself a miracle, and the abuses I have received ( see, for instance, the comments on my last post ) only a very small part of the ordeal I had to face. But I have to carry on, and do my duty, as Lord Krishna said a man must do in the Gita
Ramli Ibrahim ( born 1953 )
Ramli Ibrahim is one of the most fascinating personalities I have met.
I saw him first in the German Embassy at Delhi when he gave a performance of Odissi dance with one of his young female disciples.
Ramli is an outstanding Odissi dancer. Odissi is one of the classical dances in India, perhaps one of the oldest, finding its mention in the Natya Shastra, the oldest Sanskrit dance text. Odissi is a devotional dance, depicting or honouring various Hindu gods, Shiva, Krishna, etc
Ramli is a Muslim. Nothing wrong in that, though ordinarily one would expect a Hindu to dance a Hindu devotional style. But what is strange is that Ramli is not an Oriya, he is not even an Indian, he is a Malaysian. And yet he is a master and teacher of Odissi, a dance style which originated in Orissa.
Ramli's life, like him, is fascinating. Born in Malaysia, he is a qualified mechanical engineer, but did not pursue engineering as a profession. He was attracted to dancing at an early age, and went to Australia, where he joined the Sydney Dance Company, and toured the world. He developed an interest in Indian dance forms, and learnt Bharat Natyam under Guru Adyar Laxman. However, he was dissatisfied with the rigidly structured style of Bharat Natyam, and was attracted to Odissi, which has more scope for improvisation. Hence he became a disciple of Guru Deba Prasad Das, and learnt Odissi from him.
Today, Ramli is well known in dance circles, and has set up his own Sutra Dance Theatre, which teaches and performs all over the world. Ramli has performed the Shiva Tandav furious dance, the dances of Krishnas with gopis, and as Yudhishthir in the Mahabharat.
Ramli toured Malaysia extensively, searching for ancient Hindu temples in hills and forests. At one time Malaysia was a Hindu country, which later became Muslim. Ramli wants to restore the Hindu temples, and has received death threats from Muslim fundamentalist groups, but he has remained unafraid. He is totally secular, and believes that Hinduism is as much part of Malaysian culture as Islam.
Ramli is truly a great man
My 26 favourite old Hindi film songs
Old Hindi film songs are bewitching, and I am very fond of them. Many of them remind me of my youth when I and my generation used to sing them. I am giving a list of 26 of my favourites. You will really enjoy them
1. Kyun yaad aa rahe hain, ghuzre hue zamaane ( Film Anmol Ghadi, 1946 )
2. Jab dil hi toot gaya ( film Shahjejan, 1946 )
3.Dil ko hai tumse pyaar kyon ( sung by Jagmohan, 1945 )
4.Barsaat mein humse mile ( film Barsaat, 1949 )
5. Ayega aane waala ( film Mahal, 1949
6.Khayalon mein kisi ke, is tarah aya nahin karte ( film Bawre Nain, 1950 )
7. Ye raat ye chandni phir kahaan ( film Jaal, 1952 )
8. Ai mere dil kaheen aur chal ( film Daag, 1952 )
9. Yeh zindagi usi ki hai, jo kisi ka ho gaya ( film Anarkali, 1953 )
10. Zindagi dene wale sun ( film Dil-e- Nadaan, 1953 )
11. Tu pyaar ka sagar hai ( film Seema, 1955 )
12. Yeh raat bhigi bhigi ( film Chori Chori, 1956 )
13. Aa laut ke aa ja mere meet ( film Rani Rupmati, 1957 )
14. Suhana safar ( film Madhumati, 1958 )
15. Khoya khoya chaand ( film Kala Bazaar, 1960 )
16.Aaj ki raat badi shokh badi natkhat hai ( film Nai umar ki nai fasal, 1963 )
17. Chalo ek baar phir se ajnabi ban jayen ( film Gumrah, 1963 )
18. Tum hi tum ho mere jeewan mein ( film Ek dil sau afsane, 1963 )
19. Tum agar saath dene ka waada karo ( film Hamraaz, 1967
20. Khilte hain gul yahaan ( film Sharmilee, 1971 )
21. Koi hota jisko apna hum apna keh lete ( film Mere Apne, 1971)
22. Beqarar dil, tu gaaye ja ( film Door ka rahi, 1971)
23. Deewane hain deewanon ko na ghar chahiye ( film Zanjeer, 1973 )
24. Dil dhoondta hai phir wahi fursat ke raat din ( film Mausam, 1975 )
25. Kahaan se aaye badra ( film Chashme Buddoor, 1981 )
26. Shokh nazar ki bijliyaan
26. Shokh nazar ki bijliyaan
Sunday, 5 April 2015
Indian Judiciary is beyond redemption
The present Chief Justice of India, Justice Dattu, said recently that cases in the Supreme Court would ordinarily be disposed off in 2 years, and criminal trials in 5 years. Almost every CJI makes similar tall claims. The previous CJI made the nonsensical remark that Judges will work 365 days in a year.
There are 33 million cases pending in the law courts of India, and by one estimate if no new case is instituted it will take 360 years to clear the arrears. While many people talk of clearing the arrears, no one is really serious about it. Arrears,including arrears in the Supreme Court, have kept mounting.
When I was in the Supreme Court I heard a case in 2007 which had been instituted in 1947, that is after 60 years of its institution, and another case 50 years after its institution.
The decision in Rajendra Singh (Dead) thru. Lrs. & Ors. Vs. Prem Mai, which was decided by a Bench of the Supreme Court, of which I was a member, was a case which took 50 years to decide finally, since it was initiated in 1957 in the trial court, and was finally decided on appeal in 2007 by the Supreme Court.
This decision observed :
“ We may quote a passage from the novel 'Bleak House' written in Charles Dickens' inimitable style :-
Jarndyce vs.Jarndyce drones on. This scarecrow of a suit has, in course of time, become so complicated, that no man alive knows what it means. The parties to it understand it least; but it has been observed that no two Chancery lawyers can talk about it for five minutes, without coming to a total disagreement as to all the premises.
Innumerable children have been born into the cause; innumerable young people have married into it; innumerable old people have died out of it. Scores of persons have deliriously found themselves made parties in Jarndyce vs. Jarndyce, without knowing how or why; whole families have inherited legendry hatreds with the suit. The little plaintiff or defendant, who was promised a new rocking-horse when Jarndyce vs. Jarndyce should be settled, has grown up, possessed himself of a real horse, and trotted away into the other world. Fair wards of court have faded into mothers and grandmothers; a long procession of Chancellors has come in and gone out; the legion of bills in the suit have been transformed into mere bills of mortality.
There are not three Jarndyces left upon the earth perhaps, since old Tom Jarndyce in despair blew his brains out at a coffee house in Chancery Lane; but Jarndyce vs. Jarndyce still drags its dreary length before the court, perennially hopeless.
Is this not descriptive of the situation prevailing in India today? "
In Allahabad High Court ( my parent High Court ), criminal appeals filed 30 years ago are coming up for hearing today. The lawyer who filed it is usually dead, and the accused in the criminal case is also often dead or untraceable. I am informed that in the Bombay High Court original suits have been pending for 25 years or more. The situation is like that in the case Jarndyce vs. Jarndyce depicted at the beginning of Charles Dickens' novel ' Bleak House '.
I doubt whether the lawyer community seriously wants any reform, and as for Supreme Court Judges they mostly have a term of only a few years to seriously attempt it ( despite the talk of almost every CJI ).
Let me tell the Indian public the truth. The Indian judiciary, like other state institutions in India, is beyond redemption. I was in the system for 40 years, 20 years as a lawyer, and 20 years as a Judge, ( including Chief Justice of 3 High Courts, Acting Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court, and permanent Chief Justice of Madras and Delhi High Courts, and finally Judge of the Supreme Court ). So I should know what i am talking about.\
Dattu is talking through his hat.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)