An Awesome Sunday: First Dinabandhu Sahu Memorial Lecture

It is been rightly said that Knowledge knows no boundaries and probably it was a perfect day for a bunch of students here to travel a journey of odd-30 minutes to perplex our minds with the practicalities of legal acumen. There could have been no better use of the bright Sunday morning then to attend the First Dinabandhu Sahu Memorial Lecture 2010 organized by our beloved teacher and mentor Dr. Faizan Mustafa at the magnificent academic block of National Law University, Orissa. The event was presided by Hon’ble Justice D.P. Mohapatra, Former Judge, Supreme Court of India and the keynote speaker was Hon’ble Justice A.K. Patnaik, Judge, Supreme Court of India. The topic for the lecture was Compensation to Victims of Crimes and Rehabilitation of Convicts after Imprisonment. His Lordship began with a very interesting instance to depict the sense of humour of this great legend. Once when Late Dinabandhu Sahu was sitting in the Court room as a defense lawyer and the Public Prosecutor was arguing before Sessions Judge, being interrupted by his comments the PP who was a tall man, said “if this little man talks more, I will put him in my pocket.” Without a loss of moment, he interjected – “if the Public Prosecutor does that then he will have more brains in his picket than in his head.” With an applaud from the students and the dignitaries present there, he moved on to the topic of the day. Following are the excerpts from the lecture:

“Notwithstanding the punishment of the convict, the victim may continue to be financially crippled on account of the crime and his right to life and liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution may continue to be infringed. On the other hand, we must bear in mind that a convict does not cease to be a person and as a person continues to have the fundamental right to life and liberty guaranteed under article 21 of the Constitution. All that happens by virtue of conviction is that the convict is deprived of his liberty during the period of imprisonment in accordance with law and after that he is entitled to his fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution of India. Hence our law must provide for compensation to the needy victims of crime and rehabilitation of the convicts after punishment.”

He referred to some of the Supreme Court decisions, viz., Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa & Ors, Chairman, Railway Board & Ors v. Chandrima Das & Ors, D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal, in which the Court took the lead and awarded compensation to the victims. His Lordship also took note of section 357 of Cr.P.C. which empowers the criminal courts to award compensation to the victims. One of the interesting issues raised by his lordship in course of his lecture was that what would happen if the Court finds that the convict has no capacity to compensate the victim. To clarify the position on this point, he made passing reference to the Prisoners’ Earnings Act 1996 in England. The need for such a provision to compensate the victim in such situation was overviewed by the Supreme Court in State of Gujarat v. Hon’ble High Court of Guajarat. This recommendation was taken up by the State Legislature and it made a common fund in which a portion of wages earned by the Prisoner was set apart to be paid as compensation the victim.

The Hon’ble Speaker took a critical note of current trend as regard to the rehabilitation of the convict and opined that the law in India presently does not provide that the State has to undertake rehabilitation of the convict. The remarks made by the Supreme Court in this regard in State of Gujarat Case are remarkable. He concluded with the following remarks:

“…Law reforms for victim compensation and rehabilitation of the convict must be introduced in laws as early as possible on recommendations of expert bodies such as Law Commissions which may be set up by States. We must remember that in a democracy governed by Rule of Law any change toward a better society for the victims of crimes the convicts can only be achieved through reforms in the law and by effective enforcement of such laws.”     

The One with the Scandal.

Since I am immensely intimidated by the preceding posts, that speak of a plethora of national and international issues, I shall turn homeward and talk about something that has not only moved me legally (read: superficially) but also psychologically.

The Ragging Scandal, yes (Words have been randomly italicized to give it the sense of importance it is actually receiving).

Legally, my knowledge on ragging is close to nada. All I know is that following a Supreme Court order, a Committee presided by Dr. Raghavan who was, as far as my knowledge goes, an ex-CBI director. This initiative was taken by the Ministry of Human Resources Development (MHRD). There was also a landmark decision by the SC on the issue. Both the Committee report and the judgment have been sent to us following the scandal. I have chosen to write this post instead of reading up the documents (but does that make this post less relevant?).

According to the Apex Court in the ‘Vishwa Jagriti Mission’ matter, ragging is -

“Any disorderly conduct whether by words spoken or written or by an act which has the effect of teasing, treating or handling with rudeness any other student, indulging in rowdy or undisciplined activities which causes or is likely to cause annoyance, hardship or psychological harm or to raise fear or apprehension thereof in a fresher or a junior student or asking the students to do any act or perform something which such student will not in the ordinary course and which has the effect of causing or generating a sense of shame or embarrassment so as to adversely affect the physique or psyche of a fresher or a junior student.”

Now if we apply this definition to the incident that occurred, there wouldn't be an ounce of teasing, treating or handling with rudeness, indulging in undisciplined activities or causing anything that may be attributed to feelings of fear, annoyance, hardship or psychological trauma. The incident allegedly involved a group of seniors participating in what the courts/ university authority would describe as ragging but I shall refer to as a breaking-the-ice with a few freshers. What this consisted of was something like an introductory, friendly chitchat. Allegations involve, treating these freshers badly, using derogatory language and gestures (Is bowing down even a derogratory gesture? We were made to do it during our orientation with our seniors when our old faculty was present), and taking videos of the freshers' dancing.

According to the authority, an introduction (asking names, place of residence, hobbies and the like) is mental trauma. Reader dear, pray, do you get cold feet when someone asks you your name, or do you develop a chronic form of PTSD when you are asked about your hobbies?

Now, I'll tell you what isn't mental trauma. Being eve-teased in front of the hostel (that was eons away from civilization and was situated in the most unsafe and isolated campus) and being blamed for inviting eve-teasers and bringing eve-teasing upon myself (by the warden) was not mental trauma. The high-handedness of the administration is preposterous. They are making a mountain of a molehill right now, but when there were several security issues concerning the girls, our pleas fell on deaf ears.

Moreover, whatever happened to the Rule of Law? Has audi alteram partem gone for a toss? They have heard out only just one party and already passed judgment! This is nothing but being arbitrary, unreasonable and discriminatory. A travesty of justice in a law school, eh? Quite a paradox. "We can only give opinions that there has been a gross miscarriage of justice," says Indira Jaising in an article of hers, and I couldn't agree more.

P.S. - I might have been rather jabberwocky but this isn't to be dismissed as a sporadic burst of rage/angst against the authority. And shall I be subjected to an exclusive dance with the DISCO now that I have gone out of my way and used my freedom of speech and expression?

- Deya Bhattacharya.

UNTITLED EMOTIONS

The old campus of Kiit Law School has not only housed but harbored around five hundred intellectual legal minds. It has been for two long years that I have shared my thoughts with this not so living entity. The events of the very first day in the womb of this campus are still afresh in my mind. The premises of this make shift campus was a brain child of my mentor and the founder director of Kiit Law School. This campus always carried my mentor’s aura and his ambitious educational pattern, which has always propelled my career as a law student. As we all are aware that time and tide waits for none, a similar situation was faced by this law school. One year back there was advent of a new mentor and director with his new dynamic and prospective plans which have consistently yielded successful results. His constant and impeccable support is undeniable. The mentors changed and the priests which are none but the faculties of this temple of education also changed but someone was always there. This someone is our very own old campus. In the heart of this campus was a small room allotted for mooting activities. I might not have visited the urinary that often but of course this consortium was my favorite destination. This moot hall has witnessed great dialects and stood many fiery arguments but has never fettered any ambition. I still remember the seniors marketing presentation on transportation and a small physical conflict of opinions. In these three years this campus has seen many ups and downs. Ups being the student achievements and lows being the departing priests who had left this campus in ruins but with the candid efforts of our new director the law school is standing tall again. The crown of this law campus has been its library. My juniors had the pleasure to decorate the crown with the ruby of the first moot winner’s trophy. The library has also given shelter to many cozy birds. On eve of the arrival of the 4th batch, there was a realization that this law campus could not sustain them and there was expeditious work on other side, i.e. the new campus was build but no one notices the weeping tears of this old campus. On 4th September, 2010 the heart of this old campus was pierced. The watch was stand still at 6:05 PM and with a single stroke it was removed and there was no more a heart for our beloved old campus. In the excitement of modern amenities to be provided in the new campus we have overlooked the pain involved in the process. Of course we will celebrate the teachers’ day on 5th but please commemorate our old campus. The walls of knowledge and foundations of justice shall ever stand in the old campus 7 of KLS…

Pickon Biswal