Coup On Law And Justice – 10[Palm Tree Justice]

If maximum people do the same bad, will it turn as good?



I give an example to you to explain the present working of courts and the mode of judgments. In Telugu, there is an idiom or proverb “తాటి చెట్టు ఎందుకు ఎక్కావురా అంటే దూడగడ్డి కోసం అన్నాడట”.

The explanation of proverb: A man climbed up a palm tree. In general, on palm trees there will be pots to collect arrack from the palm tree trunks, which are used as liquor. The tree onto which this man climbed up had the arrack pots. When others question him as “Why you have climbed up the palm tree?” He replied as “to collect the grass for the cow calf.” There is no way possibility to collect the grass on palm tree and the green grass for the little calf must be available on the meadows only.

By watching the situation itself, anybody can identify that the man is bluffing. No doubt, that he climbed up the palm tree, only to drink arrack, but not to collect grass. To judge like this no need of penal code sections, cross-examinations, learned advocate’s arguments. By receiving such, answer as “to collect the grass for the cow, I climbed up the palm tree”, everybody will laugh at it. Such laugh of society will control the man from illogical and illegal behavior.

If we consider now-a-days system of law, we can notice some wonderful things, which are labeled as redtapisam. Imagine that a man is climbing up a palm tree and consuming arrack from the pots on the tree. His voice, walk and behavior are with intoxication. He is emitting the smell of arrack. People caught him and presented him in the court as consuming arrack is prohibited there. The judge started the enquiry of case. This man invested money as corruption etc and procured the certificates from M.R.O. [Mandal Revenue Officer] and other concern officers, which were stating that the man had climbed up the palm tree to collect the grass for the cow calf only, but not to drink arrack. He arranged some eyewitness with the help of his money to give witness that he collected some green grass on the palm tree. People who caught him and experienced his arrack smell and behavior are not eligible to prove the truth while compare with the certificates. His hired learned advocates argued that people who caught him and presented him to the court were wantedly done such because of personal agony. Since the court is blind, it can only hear but not watch it will consider the certificates issue by government officers. People know that the government officers can eat corruption and can issue the required certificates, but the judge does not know it. So the judge has to consider the documentary proves but not circumstantial proves. Hence, the judgment will be like this “Since the M.R.O. and other officers are certifying that this man had climbed up the palm tree, only to collect the grass for the cow calf, this court is deciding that this man is innocent. Hence, as per P.C.C. XYZ, this court is releasing, this man from this case.”

In past, by laughing, by hating, by showing disregards, society could control the people from doing disputes. Society could make the people to feel shy when they are captured with red hands, and when their scandals or disputes are exposed.

But now, dominating the intensity of voice of common people, the media is giving hero worship to such dispute makers and making them as leaders in society. This strategy of media was started some decades back i.e. at least from 1970 with high speed and still it is in continuation. By news, by movies, by literatures, the media successfully made the criminals as leaders. It had projected violence on witness and complaintees. When the victims and complaintees struggled to protect themselves and fight against such criminals, media kept calm on it. This is because; the leader of coup makers on India is the media man, Mr. Ramoji Rao, Enadu. My case itself is the proof for this.