Shades of Gray

A few weeks back, I read an interesting piece in the Pune edition of The Times of India. It was a letter to the editor. A sindhi lady had expressed her anger at Shahrukh Khan for showing five fingers in the ad for his quiz show ‘Kya Aap Panchvi Pass se Tez Hai’. The reason – showing five fingers is considered unlucky according to sindhis. What had me laughing for the next five minutes was the next line in that piece. The lady wrote  – ‘The mayor of Pune has been informed about this. Hope she takes necessary action’.

This got me thinking about the way we Indians misuse the freedom of speech and expression granted to us by our constitution. If this sindhi lady believes that showing five fingers is a bad omen, she should observe this in her personal life and within her community. Who has given her the right to force others to follow the same? More importantly, isn’t she wasting the time of Pune mayor by raising irrelevant issues?

Sometime back, some clerics have raised objections on the length of Sania Mirza’s skirt. Needless to say, Sania’s skirts, t-shirts etc. are her business and hers only. Still people who use their freedom of speech to curtail someone else’s freedom are found everywhere in the society and go unpunished. The intelligentsia dismisses them as publicity hounds and they go scot free. The same applies to those who try to don the mantle of protectors of our culture, morality and religion. Yet no action is ever taken against such elements.

After reflecting enough on this topic, I have come to the conclusion that preaching or lecturing is not going to change the behaviour of us Indians. We listen only when punishment is in the offing and by making an example of these people only can we expect to move towards a society wherein an individual is free in the real sense of the word. For this to happen, the courts and the administration need to play an active role. If someone files a complaint or PIL or makes a statement in front of electronic media and it is found by the mayor or the district magistrate or the court that the complaint is based on personal whims or preferences and infringing upon someone else’s freedom of speech, expression or way of living, strict punishment should be given to the offender. The officers cited above should be given the power to act directly against such people even if no other member of civil society has lodged a protest.

The punishment can be in two forms: A fine and some hours of community service. An indirect benefit of such a law would be a decrease in baseless cases and hollow PILs. Anything that can reduce the burden on our already burdened judicial system would be good for the society in the long run.