Black money in foreign banks has become a queer issue, setting off an equally queer debate. We are hearing arguments, for and against, which are more or less parrot-like. The whole nation appears arrayed into two contesting parties, the ruling party seeming to be on the back foot, if not in the dock. Especially, Media appears to be exceptionally prompt, not in discharging its primary obligation, but in fishing in the troubled waters, having eye on the TRP.
What actually is true or fake, is hardly a question for the victims among the viewers and the readers to exhibit promptness in fruitlessly discovering at this stage, for Apex Court is already there on the job. Any public anxiety in the matter is thus uncalled for.
Then what is called for? For those who are the victims at the receiving end, the viewers and the readers, whom the media and the two contesting parties in seisin have mischievously engaged, keeping them glued to the idiot box or the news dailies which seem no better than sophisticated and improvised politically charged cinema posters.
Please think, consider, and make out. It is time to take a stand and form a mind set in this regard. The present post is dedicated to this point.
Be it media or a politician or a political party or group, the victims are their audience, the listeners or viewers. What is delivered at the receiving end is essentially laconic, hiding more than revealing.
It is time to understand, why?
To fully grasp this aspect, one has to go into the mindset of a litigant. If there is absence of personal experience in litigation, whether as a litigant directly involved or as a steward, as are legal, para legal professionals or aides associated with their conduct. Tricks, twists and turns are bare words that are hollow, meaning-wise , if one falls outside the above bracket of experiential component of litigation.
As such, those having ever worn shoes that pinched, courtesy pending litigation of any kind, would appreciate this. Others may find this idea passing off, like a tangent. The latter category constitute a majority, for whom non-formal learning.
It is here that Media may be seen as a party obligated. Others under reference above are obviously condemned to play tricks, as litigants do. What litigants practice in law court, in circumvention of law but hiding circumventions by chicanery , is exactly that which the above said parties , arrayed in litigation in the people's court, are under obvious compulsion to practice. But the Media too steps in the fray, outwitting one another in hoodwinking its audience, by its laconic approach. This is detested.
Coming to the example in the present scenario, what media has been designedly holding back? In the black money matter, of course. Please guess and comment, if indeed figured out. But if not, let us try to explore, in subsequent posts.
(Please visit, www.rajeshsahai.blogspot.in)
विदेश में कला धन . इस विषय पर हमें इंसानी आवाज़ कम तोते की तान अधिक सुनाई पड़ रही है . ना सिर्फ दो पक्ष , पूरा देश लगता है दो पक्ष में बट गया है . सत्ताधारी पार्टी लगता है जैसे कटघरे में खड़ी है और विपक्ष गोले बाज़ी के तर्ज़ पर सवाल दाग रहा है .
ऐसे में मीडिया भुट्टे सेक रही है .
सच क्या ऐ झूठ क्या, यह प्रश्न अभी विचार का विषय नहीं होना चाहिए . इस बिंदु पर विचार करने के लिए सर्वोच्च न्यायलय जब तत्पर है ही तो किसी और को तत्परता दिखाने का उपक्रम करने की कोई आवश्यकता नहीं है.
(आग्रह है कि आगे का अनुवाद करने में मदद करें , अन्यथा मेरी टूटी फूटी हिंदी का इंतज़ार करें , visit, www.rajeshsahai.blogspot.in)

Law, fundamental vis a vis interpretative

Fundamental law as contained in any specific provision is an invariable thing until otherwise upset, either by legislation or by a judicial virdict. So, that is the most reliable plank to stand on.
The other plank is interpretation. Interpretations are of two kinds, broadly speaking. One is that which citations contain. The other is that which citations do not cover, at least directly. The latter kind are only potential concepts which ultimately get approved or disapproved by courts. 
The former kind supported by citations carry force to carry a case to its logical target.
The latter is always susceptible. It is here that litigant's own fortune works either way, especially because such interpretations are not handled single handedly. In district court it is handled by one who would be unavailable in the higher courts. Mere peripheral presence is not enough. To know how, and why, you have to further endure me, as i may cite my personal experiences that lead me to opine despairingly with regard to serious depravities that the legal segment unfortunately accosts at every level.
I write these details, because these lines are mere preludes to the exhaustive one from me , still in a formative stage.
I am also testing, whether these lines are fathomable or repugnant to a smooth reading of a discerning reader in some serious search.

Mridula Sinha, a native of Bihar, now the Hon'ble Governor of Goa, has taken pains in writing a very good article on Chchutt, carried by Hindustan daily dt.29 Oct.

Media, trading in confusion?

Thank media for trading in confusion. Is there some one around to lay bare a complete picture, free from any concealment of fact? 

What is that treaty that is under reference, constituting impediment in name disclosures? Arun Jaitley has pointed it out, but media has failed to elicit its full elaboration. Even in discussions on the TV Channels, peripheral references, either in commendation or condemnation , are made, hiding this pivotal issue. 

Another thing, the entire list is going to be placed in sealed cover before the listed bench of the Apex Court. We may hear further in this regard today onwards, but one more fear lurks.

That fear stems from the lack of confidence which media has generated in recent times. Court proceedings are not reported the way it should. Court proceedings run on two levels, one being that which the order sheet registers, the other being that which is/are transacted verbally without finding space in the order sheet. Mediamen are either unaware, non-cognisant and untrained as regards these two distinct categories or are enlightened enough to twist and turn the reporting , founded on the latter category. If one accesses the court proceedings, now on the website, it might appear that media often feeds rubbish which readers , they presume, would relish more than un-spiced , straight forward, and un-adulterated reporting. What is more, the legal segment amazingly countenances this kind of flirting, oblivious that it ultimately impairs public psyche, especially those of the literates whom the media thus steeps into a status worse  than unlettered masses.

Let us now wait, how the matter proceeds, at which level.   

Y

The clippings under reference in the previous post are attached below:-

Media, a bane-infested boon.
We have many boons that are bane infested. Media is one.
Just to drive home this point, I attach two articles, published in the Hindustan Daily dated 27th October.
One is authored by Harsh Mander, Director, Centre For Equity Studies; and the other by Rob Leech, a documentary film producer. The two articles are respectively captioned , "Pahle Mun Saaf Kijiye, Phir Sadak" , and "Yeh Naujawan Jehadi Kaise Ban Gaye". The former is obliquely critical about Modi's Swachch Bharat Abhiyan; wheteas the latter purports to analyse an issue which led author's cousin into straying away from the social mainstream and joining Al Quida.
These two contemporary issues, like several such others, are like fast food, ready to move out of the store and get consumed. Getting space in news paper columns is not like a walk in interview. Fast food-like stuff makes it efficacious for getting a ready entry, irrespective of its content value, for the desk that is supposed to examine contents happens to be like a bus stop that ill affords delay by the boarding passengers, else 'miss the bus'.
In this kind of haste, junk food gets consumed, yielding consequences that are well understood, rather broadly decried.
What is more, the intellectual rubbish that gets continually dished out has readers who might not have the requisite discerning sense. The idea conveyed thus infects. The result remains un-manifest, brewing , that which a term in Hindi would be most appropriate, of which an exact equivalent in English might require a dedicated search, as opposed to that which is in usage. The said apt term is, 'Avidya', which is an antonym of the term 'Enlightenment'. Avidya is intellectual darkness. To dispel Avidya, peripheral learning or literacy is not adequate, unless experiential supplements accompany. This is not an easy task. To appreciate this, one may adopt an easy exercise. Just take up any modern gadget. Be that a smart phone, or an internet device or a computer system or any system with advanced technology in general use but alien to the user who is a first timer. The system would put up firewalls, rendering it unusable, despite volumes of user manuals or oral guidance that are bereft of experiential aid.
Human kind is already under countless sets of complexities inundated in the above said antonym of the term 'Enlightenment', to dispel which scores of institutional and non-institutional efforts are afoot , the world over. Any contribution from any source, that augments this dark area in the human psyche, is best to avoid. To deplore is to begin to avoid. The present effort is, accordingly, a humble effort, but what is worth noticing is the fact that the deprecation is addressed against the Media which is misconceived by many to be an instrument for dispelling darkness, rather than sizing it up rightly as a junk food dispenser, doing less good than harm at the psychic level.
It is in this premise that the above said two articles are under test herein, which test would be pursued in respect of other materials that ate dished out in a junk food style.
(To be continued ...)