Sanjay Dutt’s sentencing

Equality before law and the rule of law was reinforced in the public mind when Sanjay Dutt was sentenced to six years rigorous imprisonment. His matter had come on the board of TADA court about six months back and the judge kept adjourning the matter, finally on 31 July the judge pronounced the verdict. From the legal point of view the verdict was quite satisfactory, since the minimum sentence for illegal possession of weapons is 5 years. The judge used his discretion and gave six. After the acquittal of Manu Sharma the son of an industrialist and the acquittal of the Chief Minister of Jharkand, there was a general feeling that the high and mighty always get away and that the law is systematically twisted from time to time to suit those in power. This view was dispelled when Sanjay was sentenced.

The judicial process in our country can be very predictable, as soon as Sanjay Dutt was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment he was immediately released on bail on the grounds that he did not receive a copy of the judgment, till he receives that copy he can remain on bail and after he receives it from TADA court he can apply for regular bail and thereafter the matter regarding his conviction. But explanation can there be for not giving the judgment?? The very fact Judge Kode has sentenced Sanjay implies that after hearing the matter he dictated a judgment, then why is a copy of it not given. It is not possible that the TADA court doesn’t have the printing machinery to take out a copy of the judgment. From the given circumstance it is quite clear that there is some element of manipulation involved with this issue otherwise there is no reasonable explanation for this delay.

Another aspect which must be dealt with is the public reaction to Sanjays sentencing or rather it should be called public sentiment due to its very nature. There are people who are writing blogs, saying that the sentencing is too harsh and “Munnabhai” must be dealt with some compassion and care. Here particularly I would like to quote the lines of a charted accountant who writes Column’s regularly on the website of CNN IBN.

Many will agree that Sanjay Dutt, though had a different image earlier, now, apparently, reflects a complete transformation as a human being. His apparent soft & humble gestures, the hand shakes, his statements in the court, the feeling of guilt, et al. are clearly the reflections of his makeover in the past years. Sanju Baba’s characters in his recent movies Munnabhai MBBS and the sequel Lago Raho Munnabhai carried mind-boggling touching messages which ended up leaving lost lasting & worth following impressions on several minds (I will say at least mine).

Tell me, what we are going to achieve by putting this person behind the bars. We will be seriously wasting 6 years of an amazing talent, which can be put to better use of spreading more Munnabhai messages around. But as we have to keep the punishment also in mind, so Sanju Baba can be let free to work for movies and other noble & social projects – but with the strict caveat that all the remuneration he receives from these projects should go to fund a specific social project, which can help lacs of ailing and poor families of our country by providing basic amenities of food, clothing & shelter. Besides, there can be other restrictions with respect to his moving out of country or doing or not doing certain acts or many such other things for which judiciary is more capable to decide.

Really, no one is going to achieve anything by imprisoning a worthwhile talent who is also capable of earning huge sums of money in a short period of time, which in turn can help countless deprived families in our nation. The case is set to be appealed and heard in the highest court of the country and, possibly, it is a rare chance for the judiciary to do something imaginative and create new benchmarks and examples for the years – rather generations to come.”

As soon as I read this post I wrote a comment on the website which was not published by CNN IBN, I said that im really surprised that educated people who are also regular columnists have the audacity to say this “His apparent soft & humble gestures, the hand shakes, his statements in the court, the feeling of guilt, et al. are clearly the reflections of his makeover in the past years” This Mr. Columnist of CNN IBN apparently does not know the rule of law, and the behavior of a person can hardly be judged from his films and his public appearances where he will put up his best behavior. The columnist further says “Tell me, what we are going to achieve by putting this person behind the bars. We will be seriously wasting 6 years of an amazing talent, which can be put to better use of spreading more Munnabhai messages around.” Just because a person is talented and spreads messages doesn’t mean he will be granted a lesser sentencing than what the statue prescribes, and if he does get lesser sentencing, it amounts to discrimination by the judiciary. The public reaction to this case is truly disappointing. People are not so vocal when it comes to fighting poverty a problem which we have had for decades, for those police officers who are dying in naxalite areas, for those farmers who are committing suicides for the last 100 years since 1907 (earlier it was due to British imperialism and today it is because of globalization). Had public sentiment acted for these issues we would have had a better place to live in today.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Real life immitates reel life….No it does not!!!!

Ricciotto Canudo an Italian film theoretician has described cinema as a combination of the spatial arts and the temporal arts, in other words a film is a combination of music and dance on one hand and a suitable story supported with adequate presentation and imagery on the other. So although what we see in reel life may be true, it is substantially regulated and designed with a certain objective in mind, it is a result of concoction. Whereas real life is beyond any definition or explanation if we try to define real life it can fill hundreds and thousands of books due to its vastness, uncertainty and complexity. Hence the concepts and issues which arise in real life will outnumber those in reel life substantially. Reel life is a part of real life infact it originates from real life. One of the major functions of reel life is to portray social reality in a systematic manner, its important that reel life has to be significant in the era in which it is made and showed. A very good example in this context is the transition between films of Rajesh Khanna and Amitabh Bachan. In the Rajesh Khanna films of early seventies like Anand and Bavarcheee many socialist values get reflected, values like fairness, equity and justice are reflected in these films because at that time Nehruvian socialism was predominant. Whereas in the Amitabh Bachan films of late seventies and early eighties the concept of the “angry young man” is used to show the frustrations of the people then due to the economic crisis and the introduction of mills which lead to the exploitation of the proletariat, all this was reflected through the angry young man.

Now the rural population and people from the lower social strata may be desirous of imitating reel life, but mere desire cannot lead to imitation, imitating reel life requires monetary backing and strong economic background which is absent in the people of the lower social strata, hence imitation by a large number of people is out of question.

If we observe reel life in its totality which includes not just films but also page 3, media and the add world we find that only those things get portrayed which sell easily. For e.g., if it’s a movie it has to be  a good story, a good actor, a captivating performance if its media it has to be some sensational news and other things. Whereas real life is not just about selling or acting or presenting, real life involves real situations real people and it may not always be very interesting and worth selling.

Another very important aspect is that real is driven by several ideologies, Joseph Stiligitz former chief economist at the World Bank mentions in his book that even economic and financial decisions at the World Bank were often made on the basis of ideologies and not solely on the basis of facts. Ideology therefore is an intrinsic part of real life, whereas reel life is not based on any specific ideology, its sole purpose is to attract public attention, do better business increase TRPs etc.

Some of my learned friends made a point that many people especially the youth lust for reel life at the expense of real life, now they may desire it, but imitation is not possible because the circumstances in real and reel are different, ideologies are different, and purpose is different. They may at the most imitate the clothes, accessories and fashion, but that forms a very minuscule part of what life is, we are debating whether real life imitates reel life and just because there is imitation in terms fashion that doesn’t mean life also in these two becomes similar.