 The draconian law gave the power to the police to arrest anyone found guilty of sending ‘grossly offensive or menacing’ messages through a computer or other communication device, to be jailed for up to 3 years if convicted. But much before the case could be decided by the courts, the hapless victims could be jailed unfairly in a country that boasts of being the biggest democracy on earth where we are promised freedom of speech and we feel proud to be its citizens.
The glaring example of the misuse of the law passed in 2009 by the erstwhile UPA government and carried forward by the currently ruling BJP, was in 2012 when the late Supremo of Shivsena, Bal Thackeray died in 2012 and the whole Mumbai was brought down to its knees for the cremation rituals. Shaheen Dhada, a girl who posted on her Timeline in Facebook and showed her displeasure questioning the spontaneous shutdown, was arrested and detained for 10 days. What was even more cruel, was that her FB friend Renu Srinivasan who simply ‘Liked’ the Post was also arrested and meted out the same treatment.
The honourable judges averred that the law was ambiguously worded and prone to misuse. They also added, ‘Section 66A is so widely cast that virtually any opinion on any subject would be covered by it, as any serious opinion dissenting with the mores of the day would be cast within its net. Such is the reach of the test of constitutionality; the chilling effect on speech would be total.’
I have often been warned by my friends and well-wishers not to be critical about the government or its policies on wine, howsoever disgusting, out-of-tune and archaic they might be. I was even served a legal notice once by one such body. But my take has always been that the government is made of people like you and me. What did we know about wine or its health benefits? In fact, until the issue was thrown wide open in 1991 when the TV programme in ’60 Minutes’ dwelled on the Studies indicating wine drinking in moderation was good for heart and the term French Paradox was evolved, even I was not too excited about wine even though it was considered a lifestyle drink even then. Therefore, it is our duty to inform the government through IT-Blogs, newsletter, Twitter, Facebook or any media available to us (the print media won’t even print some of the matter) and give our viewpoints and that can happen only in an atmosphere of fearlessness.
A case in point is my article only yesterday in which I have raised the issue again of my plea to the government to allow 6 bottles of wine in lieu of 2 liters of alcohol on arrival from oversas. I was chided in private by some well-wishers who felt that the customs department would be upset. In fact, I also on record saying that sometimes I like to bring an extra bottle or two of wine and let myself be questioned by the customs officer who I request to take me to the Assistant Collector so I could emphasise the need to bring samples for tasting. More often than not, they have understood my reasoning and let me through without payment of duty. Wine sampling is an important and integral part of the wine selling, drinking or writing process and who else to explain but to the top boss at the airport! (My offer for a free wine tasting session for the whole customs department, with Indian wines has not yet found any takers though, I might add).
Same thing goes with the taxes and policies. How many people remember that wine was available only in the non air-conditioned shops i Delhi and that I was very vocal about the government to allow wine sales through air-conditioned department stores and shopping malls. It might have been considered criticism (luckily this was pre-2012 by which the government had allowed such sales) but I have always been very civilised about the reporting and today it is very easy to get such a license.
We have a closed group named Indian Wine Academy, of 4500 members on the Facebook. We discuss and debate wine and various issues. Sometimes, a member might get out of line and expose himself to the Section 66A and as an administrator I warn them individually and even request them to take it out of the Post. Our members would be pleased that they don’t have to mind Ps and Qs though they all want to show the anger and angst against the government policies of lumping wine with liquor
As a rider the Court has also cautioned rightly that freedom of speech may not be used to impinge on others’ rights to freedom and there are penal sections to take care of such issues. It is a basic ground rule that everyone needs to follow even if it is on moral or ethical ground. We have taken precautions not to criticise any individual but the collective policy-which is the right of every citizen. And we will continue to warn our members about those rights. But at least the Damocles’ Sword has been taken away from our heads.
I would like to propose a toast on behalf of delWine and the Indian Wine Academy to Shreya Singhal, the 24 –year old law student who had filed the PIL (Public Interest Litigation) in the Apex Court of the country after the infamous case involving the two girls with a glass of Champagne, Prosecco- or perhaps and Indian sparkling wine from Sula, Grover Zampa, Fratelli, York or Chandon and say, ‘ Brave! Bravo!! Well done’ or like my Italian friends would exclaim, ‘Brava!!’
Subhash Arora |