In a Democracy, there is perhaps nothing higher than a Supreme Court ruling and hence a sense of disquiet descends when a particular verdict falls short of one's expectations. I'm no knower of law, but a few skewed aspects are so glaring!
SC is fully aware of the long history of the whole imbroglio, yet it somehow chooses to define "29. The sum and substance of the grievance" in a too reductive fashion. This arbitrary action makes its task easy to swiftly dismiss the case but the can of worms underneath continues to make its presence felt.
Another aspect that stands out is SC is somehow more particular about the reputation of the present Trust than that of the founder of the Ashram. It also seems to overlook the fact that the objectionable book was authored by an inmate, which no other institution would permit.
Reversing the verdict of one court has been justified by the "alive" amnesia of another court due to which the matter is hanging fire for almost a decade now. This is a live case of how culprits enjoy power and protection due to lack of appropriate and timely judicial intervention. [TNM55]
References:
1. 43 SCD 217 - Sri Aurobindo Ashram Trust Vs. R. Ramanathan The respondents are residents of or are otherwise concerned with the Sri Aurobindo Ashram in Pondicherry. They filed a civil suit being O.S. No ...
No comments:
Post a Comment