Premium
This is an archive article published on September 7, 2007

Letters to the editor

Letter of the Week

.

Jaideep Sahni’s article in the Express, like his film ‘Chak De Which India’, held important insights. So it was delightful to read Noida-based

Sajal Srivastava’s engagement with the film-maker’s ideas in his letter, ‘Kabir, chak de’ (IE, September 5), this week’s winner. Excerpts from the published letter.

THERE are several sensible observations in Jaideep Sahni’s article ‘Chak De which India’ (IE, September 1)… But to my mind, our patriotism does not carry only the label of sportsmanship. There are some equally important labels, and it is worrying if only one is sought to be emphasised. Indianness is also about being inclusive. Patriotism is a lot more difficult to define than what is captured by catchy slogans like ‘Mera Bharat Mahan’,

Story continues below this ad

‘India Shining’ or even ‘Chak De India’. If I were forced to think of one defining trait that stands out lately, it is that of entrepreneurship.

I also disagree that sportsmanship offers the only or superior path to recognition… I am all for increasing resources for sports and arts but I fail to see why this must happen at the cost of “the race to produce the engineers, doctors and managers”. And it is certainly open to serious questioning that “we may end up a nation of selfish techno-yuppies with very little character development, a distaste for teamwork and a weird understanding of what this nation is…” In fact, IT companies are the crucibles for India’s future leaders… Every IT company worth its salt is looking to build character and teamwork. And guess who they drew inspiration from recently? Kabir Khan!

Way too lenient

IT was only after a public outcry prompted the Bombay High Court to take suo motu cognisance of the Alister Pereira case, that he got a proper sentence (IE, September 7). Remember he was awarded a mere six-month imprisonment by the trial court. But given the enormous work load of our high courts, they cannot be expected to intervene all the time. What then is the remedy? Probably enacting another law that leaves little room for courts to pass light sentences in such cases. At present the law on causing death by rash and negligent driving (section 304 A of the IPC) provides for a maximum sentence of only two years. Most of those accused, especially the influential, are convicted under this section rather than being subjected to the more severe section of 304 (ii) (IPC) (culpable homicide not amounting to murder). The loophole can be plugged if section 304 A is suitably amended incorporating a higher sentence and with a provision prescribing a minimum sentence. Such a law will certainly be a deterrent. Remember, over 50,000 deaths per year in India are due to road accidents — one of the highest figures in the world.

— Hemant Kumar

Ambala

Q conspiracy?

THE brazen way in which our law minister and CBI have yet again deliberately facilitated Quattrocchi’s escape from Argentina makes one seriously rethink the role of the Nehru-Gandhis in the entire Bofors affair (‘Mr Q and Minister B’, IE, September 7). The common belief is that the Family is behind Q’s continuing evasion. But this does not explain why the NDA too did not get Q back from Malaysia. Perhaps the entire political establishment is conspiring to keep Q at large because it’s the best way to ensure that the no one from the Family can ever assume prime-ministerial office because of the taint.

— R.P. Subramanian

Delhi

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement