Sunday, August 25, 2013
The case of juvenile justice transpired after December case, and now once again after the blasphemous act in Mumbai it has turned up again. Families whose children indulge in such heinous act being juvenile often claim that the degree of punishment must be less severe and they should be given an opportunity to start their life afresh, since entire life is left for them to live. I agree with the second half of the last line, but can we really assume that a child who has committed a heinous crime like rape (there used to be a time when it was written as r*** but now that the frequency and occurrence has increased manifold so much so that it has become a regular phenomena) be considered a juvenile? I do not think so.
I read about the story of a juvenile accused in December case. His family lives in penury, and he was out in town to make a living and support his family. People who worked with him, say, he was a nice guy, only dealt with his job and nothing else, and did it sincerely, until when he left the job (in a dhaba) to become an aid in bus service. And then we all know who he is, an accomplice in the most treacherous and heart breaking attack on someone's soul who is no more.
But it has left a lagging question. Punishing a man below age of 20 cannot be easy , as a human every one knows, the life of his would be ruined if he is sentenced to life imprisonment given the gravity of crime that was committed. But does his inhuman act deserve any clemency? Where was his humanity when he was being a partner? Let the punishment be a lesson to everyone. If people still have guts to create a Mumbai after Delhi, then its evident that judiciary has been complacent, slow and inconsiderate to a large extent. Until and unless some high profile man's daughter goes through same fate we cannot be sure of any strong action being taken, just to say.
There is no reason to consider a man juvenile when convicted in crime, heinous ones. Doing that would only add fuel to fire and rather than detering people from involving in such incidents, make them more intrepid. Most of people think that they can get away easily because , "India mai kuch ni hota" is a popular belief. Other day I read a news in which a man denied from wife indulged in overpowering his daughter. News like this only makes me think about the kind of world I am dwelling and growing up in.
Its true that the plight can only be experienced by the ones who have suffered and people who protest little know how its being in such a situation where you have fear of your life ahead looming over head along with the apprehension of being ostracized from society.
Seems like, government is implementing Ostrich algorithm in case of Rapes. And rendering clemency in the veil of juvenile culture would only impede in the redressal of grievances.
Another question that comes in the same ambit is the age of juvenile to be revised. Some say it should be brought down to 16, some say it should remain at 18. While times have changed now, children have comparatively more knowledge as compared to previous times. In fact the things I know now, I can be sure that a child of 9th class knows. But still a child of age of 16 is young, unaware of realities of the world in a practical way. And why after all is there this question at all?
Its time government takes out its head from the sand and starts to implement real time algorithms. Indians want a safe sub-continent , rather than a comfortable Dollar-Rupee ratio.
Saturday, August 24, 2013
You might have guessed the content of the blogpost by the title.
My Experiments with Truth , is a book that I think I have completed in a very short period of time, the reason attributed to the depth contained in it. This splendid autobiography of M.K.Gandhi has opened in front of me many facets of Gandhi as a person I never knew. There is so much to learn from his life. Now, I know there are scores of critics of Gandhi who accuse him of so many things like Bhagat Singh's hanging, foment about his being a hypocrite, Bose conflict and the like, but this post will hold entirely what I have read from the book and how I feel not about Gandhi, but he as a person who devoted his life for upliftment of others, who took every possible initiative to make even slightest of comfortable difference in lives of people, underprivileged, downtrodden and destitutes.
In his autobiography, he has actually talked about every experiment he did in his life, by instantiating he has provided with his deeds, the fruit they bore, the hardships that followed and the arguments that periodically creeped in between the process. The best part is that he discusses his follies, his natural human instincts and how he defeated them by incessant actions. I personally believe if child marriage were not prevalent during those times in India, he would not have married.
Right from his childhood events, Gandhi discusses how every event shaped him and how he fell into bad company, how then later he obeyed his principles no matter what. For example, he refused to eat egg when the doctor asked him to , to improve his health saying it was against his ideals. I also fail to realise the rationale behind his such decision. But he believed in alternatives, always. When his son caught jaundice, he himself took care of him when he could not give the prescribed diet to him owning to idealism, which his son complied too and he was successful. He never drank milk saying it incited sensuality, normal modern man would consider it bullshit.
But the events which take away our heart, and make him consecrated deep in our hearts as the father of nation are his humility, his love for the meanest of person as himself, his care, unselfish service, his leadership skills, his strong and indomitable will, his intrepidity, amity with every man low or high in caste. His aristrocratic way of denying the orders which he just would not agree to follow, yet his law-abiding nature, his attitude, ability to swallow indifference and his infectious enthusiasm.
He has helped every poor man in need on witnessing his plight, indentured laborers in South Africa were redeemed due to his ebullient and never-say-die attitude. He completed his every responsibility and ensured that values prevailed everywhere. He taught students, being not so involved in sports during his time, he exhorts readers to play realizing the importance of it. He does not shy away in conceding to the fact that he trembled to speak in public and then how he overcame it. Speaking in public gives jitters to everyone, I can remember how diffident I used to be. Gandhi as a human, inspires me because he used his knowledge to pay heed to sufferings of others, his life was meaningful, he could have become a renowned lawyer and happily settled with his family, but he realized on seeing the grappling situation of people that he ought to do something. He was a man of heart. There is so much to learn from this man, and we must all be proud to have such a name in the rich legacy of our country.
In the end I wish to put up few lines from his autobiography which I found very beautiful :
- It has been a mystery to me how men can feel themselves honored by humiliation of their fellow beings.
- Service which is rendered without joy helps neither the servant nor the served.
- A patriot cannot afford to ignore any breach of service to the motherland.
- Nothing is impossble for true love.
- To conquer the subtle passions seems to me to be harder far than the physical conquest of the world by the force of arms.
Wednesday, August 14, 2013
Lately I have been reading a lot. From My Experiments with Truth, to Swami Vivekananda, to The Holy Bible, and they are all making me confused, leaving me into a quandary. The question to which I am trying to find the answer is, or to say I am trying to find a region where Detachment and Human Love coincide and conform. They say attachment is the fount of all pain and detachment of all satisfaction and peace. That love is for one and all and we must spread love wherever we go, but is it possible for a man to love some object and practice detachment simultaneously? I want to know the answer. I deliberate over this and end up finding them to be in separate domains.
Vivekananda practiced celibacy throughout his life yet was an apostle of compassion for everyone.Gandhi took up the vow of Bhramcharya at the age of 37 and shed every sense of enjoyment. And Buddha himself renunciated his entire kingdom in search of salvation on seeing misery around his world. They were all concerned about the pain of others but never let any bond or boundage deter them in their endeavors, and that is where my doubt lies. I live in a world that is from 1869s or before and whether the philosophy prevalent during those time should find meaning today is not much of a question, for those who want to practice pristine ways will continue, and I hope they do it understanding its meaning.
Lets say a normal human wants to love, nor that he wants to, but falls in and at the same time is conscious of the importance of detachment and believes in it, then it is natural for him to find it difficult to decide which way to go.
Its easy to practice detachment when you do not know or have not been through a faithful attachment. Trying to solve the mystery......
The tale of two little boys who decide to be enemies, only to realize how much richer life is when they’re friends — a charming reminde...