If you were to look at the world from the point of view of how people reacted to the conviction of Sanjeev Nanda in the BMW hit-and-run case, you will find there are just two kinds of people. Those who cannot contain their glee at the contention that the law indeed has a long arm, and those who are shedding copious tears over the poor young fella having to pay for being rich and famous.
Yes, the law has taken its own course. Nanda, few would disagree, was guilty as charged, and would certainly have to spend some of his youth behind bars. But the conviction is nothing to exult about. Someone was found guilty by a court of law and has been punished accordingly. That’s it. It’s time to move on. A man guilty of recklessness under the influence of alcohol deserves no media mileage. There are scores of others who need to be nailed as well.
We can do without the rhetoric that has been brimming through the news items. All the balderdash about the law taking its own course, and having faith in the judiciary, and all that. The conviction of Nanda is just a flash in the pan. For every Nanda who goes behind bars, there are thousands, maybe even millions, who cock a snook at the same law and the judiciary. Just because one enfant terible has been convicted does not mean that the world has suddenly become a better place to live in.
Something is terribly wrong with our collective psyche. We tend to fritter too much time bursting crackers over starting points. For the same reason, we make merry over three medals at the Olympics as if we have netted 500 golds. Why should we be constantly reminded that we, in most cases, have a long way to go? There’s nothing wrong with celebrating, per se; and going overboard over the same is not right either.
And then we have those on the other side of the same fence – like those who believe that the not-so-young-anymore Nanda has been given a raw deal. What raw deal? Here we have a chap who committed an act that is punishable by law. So, if the law catches up with him after nine years, why do you blame the law and his unfortunate stars?
There is certainly a problem with the convoluted logic peddled by newspapers like the Times of India. The morning after Nanda was held guilty, the morninger had a problem digesting the fact and seemed to make case that since drivers of killer Blueline buses of Delhi almost always get away with accident raps, Nanda was having to pay too much of a price. The newspaper made it a point to mention that most Blueline buses are owned by politicians and policemen, and hence enjoy immunity.
Well, two wrongs never make a right. If indeed the Times so ardently believes that owners of Blueline buses too must be put in the dock, why doesn’t it do something about it? Like publishing a list of such politicians and policement to start with? Or maybe it is just going by hearsay? If the newspaper does not have the names, it certainly has the wherewithal to ferret those out. And then it can nail those corrupt faces of public service the same way it nailed the gullible Left front leaders over the nuclear deal.
Interpretations of the law can vary; but the law, in itself, is the same for everyone.
