Bombay High Court Justice A. V. Nirgude dismissing a case of forgery and cheating saying police officers have lost their sense of humour could have been dismissed as a bad joke but is not a laughing matter and has serious implications and grave consequences. Versova police had registered a case on 1/3/2012 against Sanjay Gupta, Balaji Motion Pictures and glamsham.com for forging the summons from Police Commissionerâ€™s office to promote the film Shootout at Lokhandawala. The forged summons had the subject, â€œBriefing on the current crime scenario in Bombay.â€ It had stated â€œThis is to inform you that the Commissioner of Police requests your presence on the 29th of February at 3.15 pm on stage No 2 of Mehboob Studio to address the sudden and dangerous rise of organised crime in the city.â€ When the journalists landed at the place they realized it was an invitation for press conference. The journalists were not amused. The police were not amused. The sessions court rejected Sanjay Guptaâ€™s anticipatory bail plea. Sanjay Gupta had moved the High Court. A. V. Nirgude heard the case.
On 21/2/2011 Bombay High Court confirmed death sentence of Ajmal Kasab for his crimes during 26/11. Many people expressed happiness. Someone said he is a foot soldier and pawn and we have to concentrate or mastermind.
A murderer is neither a foot soldier nor a pawn. He is a criminal. A pawn does not have life. A man has life and he makes choices and should face the consequences.
On 5/7/2010 there was Bharat Bandh. Parties belonging to Left Front, NDA and some others had called for bandh. The bandh was in protest against rise in prices of petrol, diesel, kerosene and LPG. Many leaders courted arrest. Buses were damaged.
The bandh was supposed to be for the common man of India. Bandhs disrupt life and do not benefit common man. There is loss of dayâ€™s work. People who had to travel long distance by bus, car, train or plane suffer. Some book tickets months in advance. Many people do not get medical attention and sometimes people die.
The murders were the outcome of a social issue like a marriage with a person of so-called lower caste. However, a time has come when we have to consider these social issues as relevant while considering the death sentence in the circumstances as these.â€
This judgment is dangerous and should not be allowed to set a precedent. If something is wholly unjustified it should not be considered whether the circumstances are peculiar or otherwise. Intercaste marriage is not a peculiar circumstance, more so in Bombay.
The judgment says Dilip, therefore, must have been a prey. Either he was a prey or he was not. Even if he were a prey that did not give him a right to murder. If other people poke their nose they should be told to shut up. Since the judges were sure about him being a prey this sentence should not have been part of the judgment.
The judgment goes against equality enshrined in the constitution of India when it says â€œwhen we have to consider these social issues as relevant while considering the death sentenceâ€. This justifies discrimination on the basis of caste and less punishment for people of â€œupper castesâ€ for crimes against people of â€œlower castesâ€.
The Government of India must act. A review petition must be filed against this judgement in the Supreme Court. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Home Minister P. Chidambaram and Law Minister Veerappa Moily must begin the process of removal of these judges Justice V. S. Sirupurkar and Justice Deepak Verma.
Bandhs are different from strikes. In a strike people stop working. In a bandh other people are prevented from working, travelling, keeping schools, colleges, shops, theatres etc open. Bandhs are successful only if there is violence or fear of violence. Bandhs cannot be tolerated in a democracy. Where bands disrupt normal life it is mobocracy.