Once upon a time in Madurai...

Once upon a time in Madurai, Kovalan, an aristocratic landowner, went to pawn his wife, Kannagi’s anklet, when they fell in bad times. The pawn broker, who had stolen the anklet of the Pandyan king’s wife, decided to make Kovalan the scapegoat as the anklet looked identical. The Pandyan king immediately sentenced Kovalan to death. Enraged, Kannagi stormed the palace gates and proved to the king that her anklet had diamonds by breaking open the other pair. Diamonds rolled all over the palace court, making the Pandyan king ashamed of his deed. His queen’s anklets had pearls in them.
Today, a few elements in our democratic India are bending backwards to shame us with their autocratic ideas of the judicial system. The Pune Bar Association exposed its hollowness by trying to dissuade an advocate, Mr Sushil Mancharkar, when he declared his intention to take up the case of Himayat Mirza Baig, prime accused in the German Bakery blast case. There have been more appeals, requests and even warnings from political parties to shun the case. Their argument: Mr Mancharkar should not fight the case of an anti-national who has “killed” 17 people by his gruesome act. They have already passed the sentence in their private court that Baig was indeed the one who planted the bomb that devastated the bakery and shook the calmness of Punekars.
The BJP, Shiv Sena and the like have held demonstrations outside Mr Mancharkar’s house and even threatening him of “serious trouble” if he took up Baig’s case.
In another development, Advocate A. Rehman, Baig’s lawyer, was made to resign from the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP). He was general secretary of the party’s minority wing. The NCP does not want to be left behind in this race for political mileage as it clipped the wings of its lawyer-member so that the party could be in league of the sentimental public in the aftermath of the blast.
But, does not our constitution guarantee us our a multiple-tier legal system to prove our innocence?
Baig is an accused, not yet proved guilty. By mounting political and muscle pressure on people willing to give Baig a chance to prove himself in the court of law is an assault on democratic ideals. Why do we have a legal system if the suspects are not given a chance to prove their innocence? We could easily have the autocratic/despotic system where a suspect is sentenced and sent to the guillotine without a trail.
Our politicians do not want to left behind in this mad race to guard their vote banks, but at what cost?
Our legal system too ensures that cases drag for years, decades. What justice are we talking about? When it is delayed, it certainly is denied. People are getting impatient over the lethargic legal machinery. They need results, they need decisions. Therefore, their speedy conclusion that Baig “is” indeed guilty the moment he is arrested is a psychological satisfaction for them. They are fed up with cases of Mumbai blasts dragging on. They are fed up with an Afzal Guru or a Kasab trial dragging on. Therefore, this knee-jerk response.
Is it possible to clear the blocks in the legal machinery and oil it well enough to win over the confidence of the citizens who ride them? This will ensure they stop making such reckless statements.