A world law fortnightly published from Hyderabad, India.
Editor: I. Mallikarjuna Sharma
ADVISORS: Dr. Lakshmi Sahgal (INA Colonel), V.R. Krishna Iyer (Former Judge, SC), B.P. Jeevan Reddy (Former Judge, SC), P.A. Choudary (Former Judge, APHC), Surendra Mohan (Ex-MP), Prof. R.V.R. Chandrasekhara Rao (Politics), Umesh Chandra (Senior Advocate, Lucknow), Ravi Kiran Jain (Senior Advocate, Allahabad), Colin Gonsalves (Senior Advocate, Delhi), K. Subba Rao (Senior Advocate, Bangalore), K.G. Kannabiran (Senior Advocate & National President, PUCL), Ms. Chandan Ramamurthi (Advocate, Delhi).
Volume 4: Part 1 15-31 March 2008 No. 5-6
C O N T E N T S
1. Justice: Socio-politico-economical 3
2. LAW NEWS: History, Fiction and Queens, by Jaishree Misra 4
3. Lakshmi Bai: Rani of Jhansi by I. Mallikarjuna Sharma 5-8
4. Bhagat Singh and the GhadarMovement by Harish K. Puri 9-17
5. People’s Access to JudicialProcess, V.R. Krishna Iyer 18-19
6. On Freedom of Religion… in India, Dr. Asma Jahangir 20-22
7. Justice H.R. Khanna, KGK 23-24
8. Fallouts of ‘Secularism’ under Indian Constitution, RK Jain 25-26
9. Stoll v. Switzerland [ECHR] 27-66
10. Medellin v. Texas [US-SC] 67-106
11. Divine Retreat Centre v. State of Kerala (IND-SC) 107-124
12. NHRC v. State of Gujarat and others (IND-SC) 124-128
13. M/s Parakh Foods Ltd. v. State of A.P. … (IND-SC) 129-130
14. For Abolition of Death Penalty, Srikanth Hariharan 131-134
15. October Revolution and the Democratic Idea by RVR 135-146
16. Advertisements 2, 147
17. Poems, Bahadur Shah ‘Zafar’ 148
Editorial Office: 6-3-1243/156, M.S. Makta, Opposite Raj Bhavan, Hyderabad - 500 082; Ph: 23300284E-mail: mani.bal44@gmail.com; Film making: VSS Laser Graphics, Hyderabad - 500004 (Ph: 23325979); Printed at Pragati Offset Pvt. Ltd., Red Hills, Hyderabad - 500 004. (Ph: 23380000)
Annual Subscription: Rs. 700/-, $ 120
Life Subscription : Rs. 8000/-
Justice: Socio-Politico-Economical
is a lofty ideal ‘we, the people of India’ set to achieve on gaining independence wading through floods of ‘blood and tears’ and by the supreme sacrifices of innumerable martyrs and freedom fighters. We proclaimed our country as a sovereign, socialist, secular, democratic republic and also committed ourselves to secure liberty, equality and fraternity – all this for the general welfare and prosperity of the country as also of entire humanity. As such it would be apt for us to, from time to time, do some review of our progress towards the achievement of the objectives and some introspection about the failures occurring and mistakes made in this regard. We could not achieve enough progress in forging fraternity among the diverse peoples inhabiting this country. Communal, linguistic and regional chauvinisms abound and are even sanctified in the name of ethnic and cultural identities. At one extreme we find advocates of a steamroller centralization, admired as the only alternative to the present fissiparous tendencies, doing serious damage to whatever federal structure and spirit embodied in our Constitution and in turn giving further fillip to these very deleterious trends. At the other end are various divisive and parochial tendencies – ravings of the Shiv Sainiks, rantings of Kannadiga and Tamil chauvinists, insurgencies in the North-East and the ever-burning pyre (Ravanasura kaashtha) of Jammu and Kashmir, etc. – challenging the very existence of fraternity in our country. This again is telling on our ability to achieve sufficient justice in social, economic and political spheres. So-called high economic growth and the fast running Liberalization-Privatization-Globalization processes of recent years have not really helped the people to any significant extent but are resulting in further immiserisation – always relative, but at times absolute even – of the masses. The crying need is to build up a vast infrastructure of basic public facilities accessible freely or at low cost to the common man by pumping huge public investments and relegate the competitive mechanisms to any further improvements in the socio-economic systems. Basic necessities assured, people would be largely content and, hopefully, tend to be rational and progressive in thinking about their further needs. We are lagging very much in this respect, compared to even avowedly capitalist systems, and once we improve such basic necessities and also develop sufficient fraternity, certainly our ideal will not remain a mere mirage §§§
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
Friday, March 14, 2008
LAW ANIMATED WORLD, 15 FEBRUARY 2008 issue
Open this link for the complete issue of LAW, 15 February 2008.
LAW ANIMATED WORLD, 29 February 2008 issue EDITORIAL
INTOLERANT INDIANS
One may claim India to be one nation or view it as one country of many nationalities and/or sub-nationalities. Interpretations are variegated, even conflicting. Despite all this, there is also a longstanding emphasis on the ‘unity in diversity’ that exists, and that ought to exist, in this land of many communities, languages, religions and cultural entities. As long as outside invasions and foreign rulers were there, some common causes and basic bonds between the divergent communities existed. Even Indian nationalism originated in such confluence of necessities coupled with the ‘divine dispensation’ of the British imperialist rule. Our protracted struggle for independence had fostered the ideal and spirit of a casteless, classless, secular, socialist, or at least social welfarist, democratic society enveloping all the different nationalities and communities in a fraternal embrace. But now that the British are ‘out’, it seems the divisions and conflicts are rushing ‘in’ and, instead of unity and fraternity, wild passions of jingoism, parochialism, communalism and bigotry are gaining upper hand. Optimists may see in these developments mere though inevitable side-effects of the long-suppressed ethnic, linguistic, regional, religious, etc. identities bursting out in a freer climate after the ouster of the alien rulers; and pessimists may rue them as an indication of the eventual ‘balkanization’ of the country with few benefits if any for ‘we the people’ at large. But the point is that intolerance and hatred buttressed by mobocracy are becoming the order of the day as exemplified in the recent Raj Thackeray and Shiv Sainik attacks on the ‘outsiders’ in Maharashtra, the Taslima-hunt by communal bigots and a sulky state with the acquiescence of even some so-called leftists, tirades against films like Jodhaa Akbar, flare-ups on criticism of the ‘founding fathers’, etc. etc. Beware, all this would only give rise to the glee of diehard reactionaries and to the subversion of whatever sublime that lies in our constitution and polity §§§
One may claim India to be one nation or view it as one country of many nationalities and/or sub-nationalities. Interpretations are variegated, even conflicting. Despite all this, there is also a longstanding emphasis on the ‘unity in diversity’ that exists, and that ought to exist, in this land of many communities, languages, religions and cultural entities. As long as outside invasions and foreign rulers were there, some common causes and basic bonds between the divergent communities existed. Even Indian nationalism originated in such confluence of necessities coupled with the ‘divine dispensation’ of the British imperialist rule. Our protracted struggle for independence had fostered the ideal and spirit of a casteless, classless, secular, socialist, or at least social welfarist, democratic society enveloping all the different nationalities and communities in a fraternal embrace. But now that the British are ‘out’, it seems the divisions and conflicts are rushing ‘in’ and, instead of unity and fraternity, wild passions of jingoism, parochialism, communalism and bigotry are gaining upper hand. Optimists may see in these developments mere though inevitable side-effects of the long-suppressed ethnic, linguistic, regional, religious, etc. identities bursting out in a freer climate after the ouster of the alien rulers; and pessimists may rue them as an indication of the eventual ‘balkanization’ of the country with few benefits if any for ‘we the people’ at large. But the point is that intolerance and hatred buttressed by mobocracy are becoming the order of the day as exemplified in the recent Raj Thackeray and Shiv Sainik attacks on the ‘outsiders’ in Maharashtra, the Taslima-hunt by communal bigots and a sulky state with the acquiescence of even some so-called leftists, tirades against films like Jodhaa Akbar, flare-ups on criticism of the ‘founding fathers’, etc. etc. Beware, all this would only give rise to the glee of diehard reactionaries and to the subversion of whatever sublime that lies in our constitution and polity §§§
LAW ANIMATED WORLD, Vol. 4: Part 1, No. 3, 15 February 2008 issue
A world law fortnightly published from Hyderabad, India.
Editor: I. Mallikarjuna Sharma
ADVISORY BOARD: Dr. Lakshmi Sahgal (INA Colonel), V.R. Krishna Iyer (Former Judge, SC), B.P. Jeevan Reddy (Former Judge, SC), P.A. Choudary (Former Judge, APHC), Surendra Mohan (Ex-MP), Prof. R.V.R. Chandrasekhara Rao (Politics), Umesh Chandra (Senior Advocate, Lucknow), Ravi Kiran Jain (Senior Advocate, Allahabad), Colin Gonsalves (Senior Advocate, Delhi), K. Subba Rao (Senior Advocate, Bangalore), K.G. Kannabiran (Senior Advocate & National President, PUCL), Ms. Chandan Ramamurthi (Advocate, Delhi).
Volume 4: Part 1 15 February 2008 No. 3
C O N T E N T S
1. War on Roses? 1
2. LAW NEWS: Torture of Bangladeshi Journalist; Stop Saudi ‘Witch’s’ execution! 2, 59
3. McLIBEL 3-10,by David Wolfson 51-58
4. R v. C.L.Y. [CAN-SC] 11-18
5. British Columbia v. 19-20,Zastowny [CAN-SC] 41-50
6. V. Subbulakshmi v. S. Lakshmi (IND-SC) 21-25
7. DFO, Kothagudem v. Madhusudan Rao (IND-SC) 26-29
8. Karnataka Bank Ltd. v. State of A.P. (IND-SC) 30-40
9. Poem - Jhansi ki Rani, Subhadra Kumari Chauhan 60
Editorial Office: 6-3-1243/156, M.S. Makta, Opposite Raj Bhavan, Hyderabad - 500 082; Ph: 23300284E-mail: malliksharma@yahoo.com; Film making: VSS Laser Graphics, Hyderabad - 500004 (Ph: 23325979); Printed at Pragati Offset Pvt. Ltd., Red Hills, Hyderabad - 500 004. (Ph: 23304835, 23380000)
Annual Subscription: Rs. 700/- Abroad: $ 120 (postage extra)
Life Subscription: Rs. 8000/-
Payments to be sent by Cheque/DD/ MO in favour of LAW ANIMATED WORLD at 6-3-1243/156, M.S. Makta, Opp. Raj Bhavan, HYDERABAD-500082.
[Please add Rs. 50/- for outstation cheques]
EDITORIAL:
WAR ON ROSES?
But We Hate You!
It is no doubt hard and painful to envisage a situation when hooliganism tends to break up things, even heads, in protest against offering of roses and chocolate in expression of love, but strange things do happen in the world, and stranger so in our country. Otherwise it is very difficult to understand the self-styled custodians of ‘Hindu morality’ in Bombay and several other places in India going berserk on the Valentine Day with their hate campaigns. And they find strange bedfellows in orthodox Islamic Saudi Arabia where the government banned all celebrations on that Day, including sale of roses and any ‘red things’ even, as ‘all that is un-Islamic’! That way New Year’s Day is un-Hindu, un-Islamic; so is the April Fool Day and umpteen other usages in India and elsewhere – including the dress you wear and the food you eat, not to speak of the law and politics you mainly follow. Even your chillies are not Hindu my dear, so are tea and coffee; and the most common bananas are not of Indian origin. Whatever be, roses certainly are not Indian but that does not stop us loving their beauty and aroma. Saint Valentine of Terni and Saint Valentine of Rome may be two different persons or not, but tradition hails their fearless martyrdom in the cause of love – to be more precise, their affectionate support to would-be-couples – against Roman imperial barbaric suppression. They are ‘vicariously’ remembered and honoured on 14 February by lovers and would-be-couples exchanging chocolate and roses. What is there in it so alien to Hindu culture which is replete with love, even porn, stories of gods and goddesses and which has deified sex symbols to that pitch which no religion has done. Don’t we have our Nala Damayanti, Radha Krishna, Heer Ranjha, and so on? Capping all, we have the wisest saying ‘udaara charitaanam tu vasudhaiva kutumbakam’ and so let us all try to be liberals in mind and spirit and shun all sorts of fundamentalist excesses §§§
Editor: I. Mallikarjuna Sharma
ADVISORY BOARD: Dr. Lakshmi Sahgal (INA Colonel), V.R. Krishna Iyer (Former Judge, SC), B.P. Jeevan Reddy (Former Judge, SC), P.A. Choudary (Former Judge, APHC), Surendra Mohan (Ex-MP), Prof. R.V.R. Chandrasekhara Rao (Politics), Umesh Chandra (Senior Advocate, Lucknow), Ravi Kiran Jain (Senior Advocate, Allahabad), Colin Gonsalves (Senior Advocate, Delhi), K. Subba Rao (Senior Advocate, Bangalore), K.G. Kannabiran (Senior Advocate & National President, PUCL), Ms. Chandan Ramamurthi (Advocate, Delhi).
Volume 4: Part 1 15 February 2008 No. 3
C O N T E N T S
1. War on Roses? 1
2. LAW NEWS: Torture of Bangladeshi Journalist; Stop Saudi ‘Witch’s’ execution! 2, 59
3. McLIBEL 3-10,by David Wolfson 51-58
4. R v. C.L.Y. [CAN-SC] 11-18
5. British Columbia v. 19-20,Zastowny [CAN-SC] 41-50
6. V. Subbulakshmi v. S. Lakshmi (IND-SC) 21-25
7. DFO, Kothagudem v. Madhusudan Rao (IND-SC) 26-29
8. Karnataka Bank Ltd. v. State of A.P. (IND-SC) 30-40
9. Poem - Jhansi ki Rani, Subhadra Kumari Chauhan 60
Editorial Office: 6-3-1243/156, M.S. Makta, Opposite Raj Bhavan, Hyderabad - 500 082; Ph: 23300284E-mail: malliksharma@yahoo.com; Film making: VSS Laser Graphics, Hyderabad - 500004 (Ph: 23325979); Printed at Pragati Offset Pvt. Ltd., Red Hills, Hyderabad - 500 004. (Ph: 23304835, 23380000)
Annual Subscription: Rs. 700/- Abroad: $ 120 (postage extra)
Life Subscription: Rs. 8000/-
Payments to be sent by Cheque/DD/ MO in favour of LAW ANIMATED WORLD at 6-3-1243/156, M.S. Makta, Opp. Raj Bhavan, HYDERABAD-500082.
[Please add Rs. 50/- for outstation cheques]
EDITORIAL:
WAR ON ROSES?
But We Hate You!
It is no doubt hard and painful to envisage a situation when hooliganism tends to break up things, even heads, in protest against offering of roses and chocolate in expression of love, but strange things do happen in the world, and stranger so in our country. Otherwise it is very difficult to understand the self-styled custodians of ‘Hindu morality’ in Bombay and several other places in India going berserk on the Valentine Day with their hate campaigns. And they find strange bedfellows in orthodox Islamic Saudi Arabia where the government banned all celebrations on that Day, including sale of roses and any ‘red things’ even, as ‘all that is un-Islamic’! That way New Year’s Day is un-Hindu, un-Islamic; so is the April Fool Day and umpteen other usages in India and elsewhere – including the dress you wear and the food you eat, not to speak of the law and politics you mainly follow. Even your chillies are not Hindu my dear, so are tea and coffee; and the most common bananas are not of Indian origin. Whatever be, roses certainly are not Indian but that does not stop us loving their beauty and aroma. Saint Valentine of Terni and Saint Valentine of Rome may be two different persons or not, but tradition hails their fearless martyrdom in the cause of love – to be more precise, their affectionate support to would-be-couples – against Roman imperial barbaric suppression. They are ‘vicariously’ remembered and honoured on 14 February by lovers and would-be-couples exchanging chocolate and roses. What is there in it so alien to Hindu culture which is replete with love, even porn, stories of gods and goddesses and which has deified sex symbols to that pitch which no religion has done. Don’t we have our Nala Damayanti, Radha Krishna, Heer Ranjha, and so on? Capping all, we have the wisest saying ‘udaara charitaanam tu vasudhaiva kutumbakam’ and so let us all try to be liberals in mind and spirit and shun all sorts of fundamentalist excesses §§§
Thursday, March 13, 2008
NOTICE AND WARNING
All the readers of and correspondents to LAW ANIMATED WORLD are hereby informed that the e-mail account malliksharma@yahoo.com which we have been using till now has been hacked by some miscreants and we are not able to open it even. Moreover, fraudulent messages that this editor, namely MALLIKARJUNA SHARMA, had gone to Nigeria, lost all his belongings and even his mobile and requests confidentially the recepient of the message to send 3000 dollars are being sent to each and every earlier mail recepient from that e-mail account. So many friends and well-wishers have anxiously enquired from this editor the real state of things and were shocked to know about this fraud. It seems some coterie among Yahoo employees who operate or use the servers or some other very versatile miscreants are behind this fraud. We do not know for what other dirty purposes too they may be using this e-mail account now. So we have decided to trash that e-mail account since all our efforts to at least open it once to at least copy the erstwhile address book in it have miserably failed and our earlier complaints to Yahoo Administrators have gone futile.
As such each and every one of the readers, well wishers and acquaintances of the LAW ANIMATED WORLD and its editor are hereby warned not to use that e-mail account ever again. We will not be responsible for any anxiety, tension or loss that may incur such persons who disregard our warning or who have already unwittingly done so. We will intimate our next e-mail account through this blog and also print it on the next issue of the journal but till then the readers, acquaintances etc. may use the account mksharma55@gmail.com to correspond with us through the net.
Sorry for the trouble and thank one and all.
I. MALLIKARJUNA SHARMA, Editor, LAW ANIMATED WORLD.
As such each and every one of the readers, well wishers and acquaintances of the LAW ANIMATED WORLD and its editor are hereby warned not to use that e-mail account ever again. We will not be responsible for any anxiety, tension or loss that may incur such persons who disregard our warning or who have already unwittingly done so. We will intimate our next e-mail account through this blog and also print it on the next issue of the journal but till then the readers, acquaintances etc. may use the account mksharma55@gmail.com to correspond with us through the net.
Sorry for the trouble and thank one and all.
I. MALLIKARJUNA SHARMA, Editor, LAW ANIMATED WORLD.
Monday, February 4, 2008
Republic Day Special issue 15-31 January 2008 issue of LAW
this is the editorial of 15-31 January 2008 Republic Day Special issue of LAW ANIMATED WORLD:
No right to life for animals?
Friedrich Neitzsche made Zarathustra speak up: “…Man is the cruelest animal. At tragedies, bull-fights, crucifixions hath he hitherto been the happiest on earth; and when he invented his hell, behold, that was his heaven on earth.” The mad culling of lakhs of chicken mainly in Bengal but also in other states, as also in various countries, only confirm that reading. Would or should we ‘cull’ entire populations if and when some hundreds of humans die en masse due to plague or other mahamaaris? What permits the human conscience to callously hatch them and breed them in captivity and then mass-slaughter in captivity with nothing like minimum freedom of life allowed? Arguments of vegetarianism or non-vegetarianism apart, have we no duty to all sentient beings – can we arrogate to ourselves the right to mass-slaughter animals in the name of protecting our own few lives - that too when there are indications that the bird flu itself might have been due to us humans polluting the environment? The latest WHO records show deaths of humans all over the world as 225 out of 327 reported bird-flu cases in 5 years (2003-07) but the number of birds culled might have easily crossed the one crore mark. We may conclude with these precious observations by the Kerala High Court in some other context: “Circus animals … forced to perform unnatural tricks, housed in cramped cages, subjected to hunger, fear, pain, not to mention the undignified way of life they have to live … Though not homo-sapiens, they are also beings entitled to dignified existence and humane treatment… In many respects, they comport better than humans, they kill to eat and eat to live and not live to eat as some of us do, they do not practice deception, fraud, or falsehood and malpractices as humans do, …they do not proliferate as we do depleting the already scarce resources of the earth, …nor do they inhale the lethal smoke of tobacco polluting the atmosphere and inflicting harm on fellow beings. …it is not only our fundamental duty to show compassion to our animal friends, but also to recognize and protect their rights. … If humans are entitled to fundamental rights, why not animals?” §§§
No right to life for animals?
Friedrich Neitzsche made Zarathustra speak up: “…Man is the cruelest animal. At tragedies, bull-fights, crucifixions hath he hitherto been the happiest on earth; and when he invented his hell, behold, that was his heaven on earth.” The mad culling of lakhs of chicken mainly in Bengal but also in other states, as also in various countries, only confirm that reading. Would or should we ‘cull’ entire populations if and when some hundreds of humans die en masse due to plague or other mahamaaris? What permits the human conscience to callously hatch them and breed them in captivity and then mass-slaughter in captivity with nothing like minimum freedom of life allowed? Arguments of vegetarianism or non-vegetarianism apart, have we no duty to all sentient beings – can we arrogate to ourselves the right to mass-slaughter animals in the name of protecting our own few lives - that too when there are indications that the bird flu itself might have been due to us humans polluting the environment? The latest WHO records show deaths of humans all over the world as 225 out of 327 reported bird-flu cases in 5 years (2003-07) but the number of birds culled might have easily crossed the one crore mark. We may conclude with these precious observations by the Kerala High Court in some other context: “Circus animals … forced to perform unnatural tricks, housed in cramped cages, subjected to hunger, fear, pain, not to mention the undignified way of life they have to live … Though not homo-sapiens, they are also beings entitled to dignified existence and humane treatment… In many respects, they comport better than humans, they kill to eat and eat to live and not live to eat as some of us do, they do not practice deception, fraud, or falsehood and malpractices as humans do, …they do not proliferate as we do depleting the already scarce resources of the earth, …nor do they inhale the lethal smoke of tobacco polluting the atmosphere and inflicting harm on fellow beings. …it is not only our fundamental duty to show compassion to our animal friends, but also to recognize and protect their rights. … If humans are entitled to fundamental rights, why not animals?” §§§
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)