Even Right To Laugh Being Threatened Today; No Justice In Bulldozer Actions : S Muralidhar

“Democracy has to be practised by the people. If you don't exercise your rights you will forget that you have a right. The right to laugh for instance. Today what is being threatened seriously is the right to laugh. The only living being that can experience happiness and Joy through sarcasm, through wit, through humour is the human being. It's so inherent for you to laugh, don't take away the right to laugh. We should have the ability to laugh at least, that is the minimum that should be guaranteed to us.” he said.

Muralidhar's comments come at a time of multiple instances of comedians being subjected to legal action and backlash for expressions perceived as offensive or political. Recently, Kunal Kamra, who allegedly called Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Eknath Shinde a “traitor” in his skit, was booked under Sections 353(1)(b), 353(2) (Public mischief) and 356(2) (Defamation) BNS.

Further, during the question-and-answer session of the lecture, Muralidhar also criticized the practice of demolishing homes with bulldozers as a form of state response to alleged crimes or protests. He said, “It's not justice, these (words bulldozer and justice) are antonyms. It is a negative transformation. This is seizing power saying 'jiske haath me lathi uska bail – I have the power, who are you to tell me? You are some court, I will deal with you. Don't read to me the Constitution, don't read to me the statute. I have the power.'”

Drawing a parallel with the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, he said, “Somebody captures the Capitol and wants to deny the election results. That person should not have gotten re-elected, somebody who has defied the Constitution. But he gets re-elected.”

Taking cognizance of the pattern of state resorting to demolition of houses of persons accused of crimes as a punitive action, the Supreme Court recently laid down pan-India guidelines and held that the executive cannot demolish the houses/properties of persons only on the ground that they are accused or convicted in a crime.

He questioned people's silence against “bulldozer justice”. “How much do we protest against this? Somebody's house was bulldozed. How many of us not belonging to that community protested? Nobody. We just looked the other way – it is happening to someone else”, he said.

Muralidhar said the danger lies in apathy among those who are expected to know better. “We have no problem with that. That is where the problem is. Somebody with power will do it. If you, who are supposed to be the better-knowing persons, do nothing about it, tomorrow when that man stands for election you vote him back, you have no one else to blame.”

Justice Muralidhar pointed to inflection points in legal history, highlighting that Courts were once conservative and struck down land reform laws. He said the 1973 Kesavananda Bharati case asserted that Parliament's power is subject to the basic structure of the Constitution.

He said that the Kesavananda Bharati judgment was transformative because it held that fundamental rights, which are part of the basic structure of the Constitution, cannot be taken away even by brute majorities who may want to rewrite the Constitution. However, he emphasised that people must participate in democracy to make it work.

He said populist leaders with a brute majority often seek to rewrite the Constitution and go back to tradition. “You will always have some person holding a constitutional office who will say 'no, there is no basic structure'.” He said this temptation exists not only in India but across the world.

Muralidhar highlighted India's poor performance in various social indices, pointing out that India's top 1 percent held 40.1 percent of the wealth in 2023. He cited the Global Hunger Index where India ranks 105th out of 127 countries. “It is very disturbing that 2.9 percent of children die in India before they are five,” he said.

He highlighted that courts have supported and also halted transformation. He pointed to the liberalisation in 1991 in which courts were deferential to economic policies. However, the Court have also placed checks on legislative and executive powers, pointing to the Kesavanada Bharti judgment and the SR Bommai judgment.

He emphasised that transformation can be negative too and cautioned that not all transformations brought by technology and AI are positive.

Also from the lecture - Only Way To Protect Constitution Is To Practise It, Otherwise It'll Die : S Muralidhar

The lecture can be watched here.