A week or so back, a court dismissed a public interest litigation. It was no landmark judgment in that sense. But it had a message for many morally-upright people in this hallowed land.
The Delhi High Court on July 29 dismissed two petitions that sought a stay on the reality show Sach Ka Saamna. The court was clear in what it said, "Our culture is not so fragile that it would be affected by one TV programme."
The point is not whether the reality show is good, bad, or ugly. But why many in this country have this innate, burning desire to play the moral police. The problem is compounded by the fact that there are many shades of these morally-condescending lot. Either they indulge in rampant, wanton violence. Like ransacking art galleries. Like tearing apart film theatres. Or, they go to court. You know, like very urbane, urban people. After all, they can take recourse to archaic sections that still lurk in the Indian Penal Code.
Civilised people, of course, don't approve of violent means. So whenever the Shiv Senas or other unheard-of senas run amok, they cluck their perfunctory, sanctimonious tongues. Parrot all the right-sounding, politically correct words. And the acts of the violent ones are dismissed as dastardly and uncivilised. That's how this, usually-termed, civil society behaves.
What these same civilised people fail to do is mouth the same kind of trenchant words of condemnation for those who use the law to play the moral police. Ideologically, these people are no different from the maurauding senas. They just feel that they are our moral guardians and everyone has to play by their rules.
If war is continuation of politics by other means, taking people to court over perceived acts of moral depravity is as much continuation of the same politics of moral policing through non-violent means. It may not be physical, but it is as violent cerebrally and intellectually.
Yes, this is something that never sinks into the thick skulls of India's venerable moral police. It took the Supreme Court to suspend legal proceedings initiated by a lowly court against Richard Gere for the kiss he planted on Shilpa Shetty. The apex court criticised the complainant for his "moral policing" and observed, "such complaints are publicity hunting. You are bringing a bad name to this country". But no. The court's words did not have that sinking feeling, you see.
The Supreme Court and at least one High Court may have given us their take on such moral policing. We know what will happen when frivolous contentions are dragged there. That is not where, however, the danger lies. The danger, unfortunately, lies in the halls where our lawmakers decide our futures.
After all, when the Delhi High Court bench said, "It is for the government to decide whether the programme should be banned or not. It is not the function of the court .., " it set the stage for our politicians to step in.
The government has been dithering on a code of content for television channels. It is so far a draft, but may soon be writ unto law. Then the dirt will hit the proverbial fan.
So long, then.
