Dear Editor,
The freedom of speech guaranteed by the Constitution under Article 19 (1) (a) is being grossly misused by some people. Those who want to make use of the freedom of speech have conveniently forgotten what the Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code says. Constitutional aspect of Section 295A places reasonable restriction of the said Article which states “no person should use this fundamental right of freedom of speech and expression to insult or hurt the religious sentiments of any class”. The representatives of the people forget the oath taken at the time of swearing-in ceremony as MP or MLA. They take oath either in the name of God or in the name of truth. They promise allegiance to Constitution. They attend to oath-taking ceremony and take oath only because it is obligatory to an elected MLA or MP to do so. The oath taken is observed more in breach than in honour. Oath-taking has become ‘a meaningless ritual’ like the litigant public in courts are made to read the oath written on a placard or board. The case in point is that an RJD MLA Fateh Bahadur has no qualm to say “Godess Saraswati was characterless”. Dissent and honest differences of opinion with the others are not bad upto a certain level. Concurrence with or opposition to policies and programmes of the government must be respected. What is right must be accepted. The MLA has hurt the religious feelings of the people. People accustomed to hurt the religious feelings and promoting enmity are on rise because the arms of law are not catching the influential persons. The offenders are not convicted within a reasonable time-frame. The laws are taking such a lengthy course that the offenders will not be alive by the time a decision is taken on the alleged offence committed. Delayed delivery of justice has been emboldening the habitual offenders to commit more and more offences with no fear that they may be convicted. As soon as some offensive statements are issued, an FIR is registered to mute the voice of public. Public memory is short. When certain offensive remarks are made, the gravity of the offence committed will be there for all to see. In these days of advanced science and technology it is not easy to deny the offensive statement issued. There cannot be absolutely no need to prolong the cases when the offensive statements issued are there for all to see. The loose canons promoting the enmity and disturbing the peace and tranquillity can be convicted without giving long rope for arguments and counter-arguments. The accused must be given the chance only to accept or deny the statements attributed to them. A lesser punishment can be given to those who confess. A little harsher punishment should be awarded to the offender when the statements attributed to the accused are recorded and produced in the court which can be ample proof for conviction. Conviction within 15 or 20 days will go a long way in curbing the future offenders. Convicts lose their status and position. Bahdur has joined the group of Bihar Education Minister Chandrashekhar who denigrated Ramacharithamanas, Mahua Moitra , ex-TMC MP who portrayed Godess in an abominable position, Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal who had mocked Hindu Gods holy symbols and traditions and shared a cartoon depicting Hanuman burning JNU to divert attention from alleged problems faced by government of India, AIMIM leader Danish Ali who had posted an extremely offensive comment on Shivlinga on social media, Ratan Lal, an Associate Professor of History at Hindu College in Delhi University who said that the Shivling found in the Gyanvapi was also circumcised and Dr. Jitendra Kumar, an Assistant Professor of the department of forensic medicine who linked rape to Hindu deities. The list of persons who have gone scot-free even after using abusive words against Hindu deities is endless. The tribe of people misusing the Article 19 (1) (a) is growing. Unless the tree of offenders is felled or uprooted taking to legal course and the legal luminaries taking the issues seriously in the disposal of the cases within a reasonable time framework, the days ahead will be filled with such people only. Forgetting the Supreme Court verdict on Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute, the petitioner Iqbal Ansari who showered flower petals on Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s convoy proved thousand times better than people like Bahadur, Chandrashekhar, Mahua Moitri, Kejriwal, Danish Ali, Ratan Lal and Jitendra Kumar.
K.V Seetharamaiah
