Today the Supreme Court of India has cited the mythical Krishna-Radha non-conjugal live-in arrangement as a precedent in cases of such understanding between consenting adults. Thereby a more liberal definition of what constitutes a household is now upon us in India. But it is of peculiar interest to note the use of mythology in this case as a tool of understanding a moral dilemma.
On the other extreme, this also reminds us of the Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M Karunanidhi's statement from 2007 on the Ram Setu issue where he brazenly noted the absurdity in the use of mythological elements in making a point. But in today's pronouncement it is understandable that the Chief Justice would use myths to counter moral muddles - they do speak in the same language and tone.
A judge's life must be interesting - to sit in judgment on matters that may constantly questions his character, beliefs and convictions. Such a line of work must allow for little or no self-doubt. I am not sure therefore if any judge would concede that a particular judgment is beyond his moral capabilities.
But in life some questions are simply beyond answering. To sustain themselves in their profession, this fact has to be denied or suppressed by the adjudicating authority. As an aid in such cover-ups is where folklore and anecdotes find their place in judgments. By citing such precedents one can deflect to the past (both mythical and factual) answers sought for the present.
Links:
http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_no-offence-in-pre-marital-sex-live-in-relationship-says-supreme-court_1362499
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/where-is-proof-ram-built-bridge-asks-karuna/217566/
2 comments:
I agree with the Judge
He was open minded to state
a mythological evidence
The fact that living relationships
moral or immoral were part of
society from times immemorial.
Here is a very liberal verdict for a conservative country. So its good that the courts explain itself. On the Krishna-Radha thing, look at it this way: It could be said - "it was wrong then and it is wrong now, just because they did something like that in the old tales doesnt make it right". I think this line of argument can prove useful for the conservatives - be nostalgic about the past by all means, but dissociate from any follies found in that past.
Post a Comment