1996 - Neelam Mahajan Singh Vs. Khushwant Singh & Delhi Police Commissioner against "Women and Men in My Life"
Pranab Kumar Roy :-
1. "Ordinarily I admire your writings, but this is one of finest reads ! Absolutely mesmerising".
2. Khushwant Singh was a good storyteller. I have heard this remark from many of my friends, which I never endorsed. I am a diehard fan of JW Schultz, start reading, you are glued to it! His fan club flourishes amongst today's generation too. Khushwant adopted Schultz style of story telling but with an obscene twist, which definitely makes him 'the most perverted man'.
☆ Love making is entirely guarded private behaviour with emotional attachment. Khushwant always depicted love making as erotica, which is prominent mark of his pervert mind set.
In the book 'Women and Men in My Life', he described 'many women as sex maniacs and nymphomaniacs', or did he want to emerge as the macho man?
His books should have banned, yet they were not ! Most of his books carried a tint of cheap porno literature. But "Women and Men in My Life is the most immoral write up".
Those women were all creative people, famous in their own fields. Khushwant had no business in maligning them in his dirty porno canvas. When the book was published none of those talented women were alive to defend themselves.
Khushwant Singh was from St. Stephen's College alumni and Oxford educated too. His study of woman's world would have been different, had he read Sharat Chandra. He would have understood the pain a woman is subjected to, the desire which a woman suppresses till her last breath and the circumstances when a woman rises up to revolt! The lustful mind with unending desire for sex, which Khushwant harboured, could only churn out a book titled 'Women and Men in My Life'.
Now I know why the 'learned' judge was amused to vividly describe the excerpt of the book, when he wanted to dispose the case.
The perverted writer, only created many Khushwants in the society, the sex maniacs. ☆ I picked up the book in AHW book stall, perhaps read it half way and "threw it out of compartment as trash".
☆ Neelam M. Singh, did exhibit the courage to approach the Delhi High Court, through V. K. Shali, to ban the book, but the erotic masala amused the Court also. Nothing has changed much! We now have a fallen system through out the world. Just reminds of Brazilian Pres, JAIR BOLSONARO and his perverted remark on women. Wasn't he here as the VVIP guest on Jan 26th January 20? I salute you, Neelam for your unusual strength, do not give up but beware, the world is getting crueler".
Pranab Kumar Roy.
JOURNEY OF LIFE: BY NEELAM MAHAJAN SINGH aka NEIL, aka NEELAM M. SINGH
प्रभूनाथ सिंह जी का अवलोकन:
Prabhu Nath Singh analyses :-
स्वर्गीय महान लेखक सरदार खुशवन्त सिह द्वारा लिखित 'वूमेन एण्ड मेन ईन माई लाइएफ' (Women and Men in My Life) मे, जिन जिन महिलाओं एवम् पुरुषों के चरित्र का वर्णन सरदार जी ने किया है, उस विषय पर लेखक की प्रशंसा करूँ या विभत्सना? समझ के परे है!
मैं अनपढ़ गँवार भय मनऊ
कहत ठेठ गावन के कनऊ
मरत पतोहू विदा भय बेटी
उन पर लांछन नरक नही पयहूं!
☆ अर्थात गाँव मे कहा जाता है कि पतोह (बेटे की पत्नी) के मृत्यु तथा बेटी के शादी के बाद, घर से जब बिदा हो जाती है, तब ईन दोनों पर लान्ंछन लगाने वाले को, नर्क मे भी स्थान नही मिलता है। लेखक खुशवन्त सिह जी ने अपने लेख मे सभी वर्णित महिला के चरित्र का नाकारात्मक वर्णन तब किया, जब सभी महिला स्वर्गवासी हो चूकीं थीं ।
विदुषी, साहसी, लेखिका, पत्रकार एंव मानवाधिकार अधिवक्ता, सुश्री नीलम महाजन सिंह ने इन सभी स्वर्गीय महिलाओं के सम्मान की रक्षा के लिए, माननीय दिलली उच्च न्यायालय में, धारा 292, 509, IPC के तहत, लेखक श्री खुशवनत सिह जी के ख़िलाफ़ मुकदमा दायर कर सभी स्वर्गीय महिलाओं को आदर प्रदान किया तथा उनकी आत्मा को शान्ति एवम् सम्मान दिया । धन्य हो नीलम!
प्रभू नाथ सिंह (वैज्ञानिक एंव चिंतक)
1996 - नीलम महाजन सिंह जी, वरिष्ठ पत्रकार, लेखिका, मानवाधिकार उलंघन विशेषज्ञ, मौन-मृत महिलाओं की अस्मिता की संरक्षक बनीं! अमृता शेरगील - चित्रकार एवं कवयित्री, देवयानी चौबाल, फिल्म समीक्षक, रमा बैनस और उनकी बहन, इंद्राणी आयेकाथ गयालातसान, आई एस जोहर, बदरुद्दीन तैयाबजी, आदि का मरणोपरांत चरित्रहनन् किया!
३० वर्षों से संघर्ष पथ पर अग्रसर सदैव: नीलम सिंह जी, क्रांतिकारी कार्तिका वीरांगना! पूरा लेख अवश्य पढ़ियेगा! "यह मृत महिलाओं / पुरुषों की अस्मिता का प्रतीक बना"।
Neelam M. Singh Vs. Commissioner of Police - Delhi & Khushwant Singh, Editor & Author, was an Order passed by Delhi High Court. Neelam Mahajan Singh, through her counsel V. K. Shali, had moved Delhi High Court for obscene, vulgar, sexually pervert writings, with double meanings, by celebrated author Khushwant Singh. All the women mentioned by Khushwant Singh, were dead, and not there to protect their dignity and honor, vide his book: 'Women and Men in My Life' ! It was a known fact that Khushwant Singh was swarmed by high society Lutyen's women! Wow! Big deal !
Please read the full Order!
"Khushwant Singh wil not have such place for prudery and hypocrisy,"(Portion of Court Order). The objectionable paragraphs of the book were re-edited. Khushwant Singh never used obscenity, vulgarity against women, after this case of Re: Neelam Mahajan Singh Vs. Khushwant Singh. The message was loud and clear. Neelam M. Singh.
Issued in Public Interest !
The Judge gave a 22 Pages Order! Obscene chapters of the book were removed by the publisher.
Neelam M. Singh
Human Rights Article 21 in The Constitution Of India 1949
This case had lots of participation by the Hon'ble Judge, whose verbal observations, at times were, objected to, by Neelam M. Singh! It's okay, Judges do give advice. At times they may not catch a point, due to their overburdened schedules.
Para 2 of the Order:
"A little while from now, I will revert to some of the women and men in his life. I will have to, since Neelam Mahajan Singh feels that some of the passages in the book have the tendency to deprave the character of the persons in whose hands the book is likely to fall and that the writer had discussed sex in a manner which, according to her, is offensive to public decency and morality and likely to "pander to lascivious prurient or sexually precocious mind." She also feels that Khushwant Singh has played with the "'Chastity and dignity" of some of the persons who are dead. Hence this writ petition for banning of the book, seizure of its remaining print order and for direction to the Commissioner of Police for registration of case under sections 292, 509 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
(3) The petitioner tells us that she had purchased the book "in a routine manner" and after going through the same had felt "against (sic) and shocked at the cheap vulgar and obscene writings about the dead persons" hurting thereby her "sensitivities as a woman". She thus reminds us of that excellent saying of Solon' and worthy of the wisest of the Seven, who, when he was asked "what would rid the world of injuries? - "If the bystanders", says he "would have the same resentment with those that suffer the wrong."(Old and True. An Extemporary Anthology 1941-1943 English Universities Press.] (4) Let us first have a glance at some of the women in Khushwant Singh's life."
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1084653/
Chandrakant Kalyandas Kakodar vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 25 August, 1969
Section 292 in The Indian Penal Code
Samaresh Bose And Anr vs Amal Mitra And Anr on 24 September, 1985
Vishvajeet Sharma & Anr. vs State & Anr. on 11 September, 2009
Sh. R.K. Jain (Raj Kumar Jain Huf) ... vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax And ... on 15 March, 1996
R. K. Jain & Ors. vs Commissioner Of Income Tax & Ors. on 15 March, 1996.
Obscene, Johar, Khushwant Singh sex,
adolescent, morality, Ydeshi, fuck star, lascivious, mistress Madam Speaker: the question is? Naked, push down, Samaresh Bose, film, Inder Sain,
Ranjit D. Udeshi
Neelam Mahajan Singh
Delhi High Court
Neelam Mahajan Singh vs Commissioner Of Police on 1 March, 1996
Equivalent citations: 1996 CriLJ 2725, 61 (1996) DLT 871, 1996 (37) DRJ 154
Author: J Singh
Bench: J Singh
JUDGMENT Jaspal Singh, J.
(1) Men have always been curious about the lives of other people. It is probably for. this reason that biographical narratives of real lives, lived in a specific time and place and which provide an insight into the real world of another person have always fascinated readers. In a way such writings enable us to try on another identity and thereby broaden our own. Khushwant Singh who gave us the monumental History of the Sikhs, contributed to the Indian Section of the Encyclopaedia Brittanica, translated some of the Sikh scriptures and wrote that unforgettable Train to Pakistan, has brought out "The Women and Men in my life" in which he has penned certain life sketches literally showing us individuals which by and large cannot be crammed into conventional cultural categories. His women, in particular, have a formidable presence. They are not the kind who would scurry to hide in chicken droppings. Despite hazards, tests and tribulations, they generally come out unvanquished. And, with a deft pen, he describes how each of his woman's world was made, and what happened to her in the making or unmaking of it and on way to such description he displaces Freud's condescending notion that a woman does not develop beyond the age of thirty, remaining permanently childish into old age. However, he does not seem to be that lucky with men in his life; this, at least, is the impression which one gathers. Is it for this reason that on the cover of the book one finds only women around him?
(2) A little while from now, I will revert to some of the women and men in his life. I will have to, since Neelam Mahajan Singh feels that some of the passages in the book have the tendency to deprave the character of the persons in whose hands the book is likely to fall and that the writer had discussed sex in a manner which, according to her, is offensive to public decency and morality and likely to "pander to lascivious prurient or sexually precocious mind." She also feels that Khushwant Singh has played with the "'Chastity and dignity" of some of the persons who are dead. Hence this writ petition for banning of the book, seizure of its remaining print order and for direction to the Commissioner of Police for registration of case under sections 292, 509 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
(3) The petitioner tells us that she had purchased the book "in a routine manner" and after going through the same had felt "against (sic) and shocked at the cheap vulgar and obscene writings about the dead persons" hurting thereby her "sensitivities as a woman". She thus reminds us of that excellent saying of Solon' and worthy of the wisest of the Seven, who, when he was asked "what would rid the world of injuries? - "If the bystanders", says he "would have the same resentment with those that suffer the wrong."(Old and True. An Extemporary Anthology 1941-1943 English Universities Press.] (4) Let us first have a glance at some of the women in Khushwant Singh's life.
(5) The .first was a wonderful mimic with no respect for the men and women she wrote about. She did not mind attending dinners without invitation and going to stag parties with blue films on the menu. Despite all this she was friendless, and essentially a private person. She was one of those women whose beauty lies in their bulk and yet being very self-conscious of their size, go on a crash course of dieting losing in the [Old and True, An Extemporary Anthology 1941-1943 English Universities Press] process little weight but much of charm. Though later stricken with paralysis leaving her one side completely numb, she underwent the ordeal singly for she was too proud to ask for help. And yet we find this very woman (when in the prime of her health) on being attacked by the sons of a male actor, rushing to Khushwant Singh with "tears streaming down her eyes" and repeating over and over again what those boys had threatened to do to her, "We'll bugger bloody bitch till you scream for help". She had once incurred the wrath of cine-hero Dharmendra also. This was on account of a "very bitchy" piece on him which made him out to be "a superstud". She wrote about how "he serviced two to three starlets everyday in the studios before he returned home to do his 'home work' on his wife's bed' This upset Dharmendra who waylaid her one afternoon and "gave her choicest Punjabi abuse and slapped her". This led her to lodge an F.I.R. at the police station and the news made the front pages of all the Bombay papers. This "fat, full of life, malicious, gossip, mimicry and zest for life" woman was Devyani Chaubal.
(6) Indrani Aikath Gyaltsen did not remain in Khushwant Singh's life for long. Her father was a mine owner with home and fortune in Chaibasa. Her first husband was a Bengali in the I.A.S. Finding him a bore, she divorced him and married a very handsome tea planter and lived with him in a spacious well-kept bungalow done up in upper class European style with not a touch of desi about anything. She wrote poetry but was dissatisfied as there was no money in it. Khushwant Singh made her write her first novel. It got excellent reviews and was accepted by foreign publishers. Her second novel did better than her first novel. But then she was a woman impatient for fame and money. "Why don't people ask me for autographs? Why I am not as widely read as Shobha De'? She asked Khushwant Singh, who assured her that after she had published a few more novels, people would seek her out. And as for selling like Shobha De, he told her, "Put some fucking in your writing and you will be as widely read". Was it an advise or a comment on somebody else's style of writing? We do not know. There is however no doubt that profits of pornography are legion. Khushwant Singh tells us that Indrani Aikath Gyaltsen died of depression but not before being accused of plagiarism.
(7) We know Amrita Shergil as a great painter. We came to know about her as a person through her own nephew and an artist in his own right and more so through the memoirs of a highly respected civil servant Badruddin Tyabji wherein he describes his own encounter with her. Khushwant Singh picks it up from there as follows: "Her modus vivendi is vividly described by Badruddin Tyabji in his memories. One winter when he was staying in Simla he invited Amrita for dinner. He had a fire lit for protection from cold and European classical music playing on his gramophone. He wasted the first evening talking of literature and music. He invited her again. He had the same log fire and the same European classical music. Before he knew what was happening, Amrita simply took her clothes off and lay stark naked on the carpet. She did not believe in wasting time. Even the very proper Badruddin Tyabji got the message." He sheds more light on her private life by telling us that Malcolm Muggeridge had got reduced to "a limp rag" within a week's time with her and that "For several weeks before her arrival in Lahore I had heard stories of her exploits during her previous visits to the city before she had married her cousin. She usually stayed in Faletti's Hotel. She was said to have given appointments to her lovers with two hour intervals at times six to seven a day - before she retired for the night. If this was true (men's gossip is less reliable than women's) love formed very little part of Amrita's life. Sex was what mattered to her. She was a genuine case of nymphomania, and according to her nephew Vivian Sunderam's published account, she was also a lesbian." Khushwant Singh says that she wanted to seduce him too and though he was a willing target her untimely and sudden death deprived her of yet another trophy.
(8) Coming to the men in the life of Khushwant Singh, I may confine to Inder Sain Johar since the petitioner has raised objections to certain passages appearing with regard to him only.
(9) Inder Sain Johar had acted in some films, including a couple of Hollywood productions in English and had later turned from acting to directing. He married Rama Bans who after giving birth to two children from the marriage, divorced him but after a disastrous second marriage, resumed some kind of undefined relationship with him. It appears from the account that Johar was publicity crazy. The less work he got, the more stories he made to remain in the limelight. He was so keen to be in the news that in the presence of dozens of photographers and pressmen he got engaged never to be married later to Protima Bedi. He even wrote an autobiography and sent its manuscript for serialisation in the Illustrated Weekly. Says Khushwant Singh: "JOHAR sent me the manuscript of his autobiography for serialisation in The Illustrated Weekly. It was difficult to tell how much of it was factual, how much the creation of his sick fantasies. In any case, there was more sex in it than was permissible for journals at the time. If Johar was to be believed, he started his sex cupboard at the age of twelve. He was spending his vacation with his uncle and aunt who had no children of their own. One night he had (or pretended to have) nightmares and started whimpering in his sleep. His aunt brought him to her bed. He snuggled into her bosom and soon had an erection. He tried to push it into her. She slapped him and told him to behave himself. The next morning he was afraid he would be scolded and sent back home. However, his aunt was sweetness itself. After her husband had left for his office, she offered to bathe him. While she was soaping him, he again got sexually aroused. This time his aunt taught him to what to do with it. It became his daily morning routine. Nevertheless, Johar confessed that in the years of his adolescence what he enjoyed most was being buggered by older boys. The autobiography did not mention Rama but in the years after their separation he wrote of a starlet (now a star I won't name) whom he set up in a flat in Malabar Hill. Whenever he felt like it, he would drop in on her, have a drink or two and then bed her. One evening he was in a particularly horny mood. When he got to the lady's flat, he was informed by her young Goan maidservant, "Memsahib bahar gaya" (madam has gone out). "Kab ayega?" (When will she return?) "Kya maloom? Bahut late hoga." (I don't know, she will be late), replied the maid. So Johar simply pushed the girl on the bed and mounted her. The girl protested. "Memsahib ayega to hum boleyga" (when madam returns, I will tell her), and at the same time opened her legs to her mistress' paramour. Even more bizarre was his story of how he bedded two sisters and their mother. One sister had been his mistress for some years before she left him to get married. She introduced her younger sister to Johar and asked him to help her get into films. He not only got her a few minor roles but also asked her to stay in his flat. One evening she came back from the studios looking very tired. Johar asked her if she would like a hot cup of tea or something stronger to cheer her up. She replied, "if you really want to know what I would like best, I'd like a nice fuck." The girl left Johar to become a star. Her mother wrote to Johar to thank him for what he had done for her daughters and asked him if she could stay with him for a couple of days when visiting Bombay. One night she came to his bed, stark naked. "I did not want to hurt the old lady's feelings," wrote Johar, and "obliged her the same way I had obliged her daughters." How could I have published these memoirs without inviting the wrath of the proprietors of the journal on my head? Johar accused me of cowardice. I accused him of making up stories."
NEELAM Mahajan Singh has confined herself to the accounts. of only the above noted persons. She finds some of the passages in their life sketches as "obscene". She has reproduced them in paragraph 8 of her Writ petition. They run as under:
8.1.ABOUT Devyanichaubal "SHE went to the police station and lodged an F.I.R. against the two boys. The next morning she came to my office to tell me about the incident. With tears streaming down her eyes she repeated over and over again what the boys had threatened to do to her, "we'll bugger you bloody bitch till your fat bum is blue; we will f......till you scream for help".(page 8) "On another occasion she wrote a very bitchy piece on Dharmendra allegedly based on an interview he had given her. He was known to be a bit of a stud; Devyani's account made him out to be a superstud. She wrote about how he serviced two to three starlets every day in the studios before he returned home to do his "home work" on his wife's bed. Dharmendra was understandably very upset".
8.2ABOUT Indrani Aikath Gyaltsen "I thought Indrani was riding on cloud nine. But she was impatient for fame and money. We met at the Calcutta book fair. Her second novel Crane's Morning was due to be released that week. "Why don't people ask me for autographs? Why am I not as widely read as Sobha De? She asked me. I assured her that after she had published a few more novels, people would seek her out. And as for selling like Shobha De, I told her, "Put some fucking in your writing and you will be as widely read." She did not approve of my language. "I am not that kind of a writer," she replied with haughty disdain."
8.3AMRITA Shergil "SHE was said to have given appointments to her lovers at two hours interval before she retired for the night. If this was true (men's gossip is less reliable than women's) love formed very little part of Amrita's life. Sex was what mattered to her. She was a genuine case of nymphomania, and according to her nephew Vivian Sunderam's published account, she was also a lesbian. Her modus vivendi is vividly described by Badruddin Tyabji in his memories. One winter when he was staying in Simla he invited Amrita for dinner. He had a fire lit for protection from cold and European classical music playing on his gramophone. He wasted the first evening talking of literature and music. He invited her again. He had the same log fire and the same European classical music. Before he knew what was happening, Amrita simply took her cloths off and lay stark naked on the carpet. She did not behave in wasting time. Even the very proper Badruddin Tyabji got the message".
"HE was then in the prime of his youth - early 20s. In a week she had reduced him to a limp rag. "I could not cope with her," he admitted. " I was glad to get back to Calcutta."
"HERself-portraits were exercises in narcissism. She probably had as a nice a figure as she portrayed herself in his nudes but I had no means of knowing what she concealed beneath her sari. What I can't forget is her brashness."
8.4INDER Sain Johar "ONE night he had (or pretend to have) nightmares and started whimpering in his sleep. His aunt brought him to her bed. He snuggled into her bosom and soon had an erection. He tried to push it into her. She slapped him and told me to behave himself. The next morning he was afraid he would be scolded and sent back home. However, his aunt was sweetness itself. After her husband had left for his office, she offered to bathe him. While she was soaping him, he again got sexually aroused. This time his aunt taught him to what to do with it. It became his daily morning routine. Nevertheless, Johar confessed that in the years of his adolescence what he enjoyed most was being buggered by older boys."
"THE autobiography did not mention Rama but in the years after their separation he wrote of a starlet (now a star I won't name) whom he set up in a flat in Malabar Hill. Whenever he felt like it, he would drop in on her. One evening he was in a particularly horny mood. When he got to the lady's flat, he was informed by her young Goan maidservant, "Memsahib bahar gaya" (madam has gone out). "Kab ayega? (When will she return?) "Ky maloom? Bahut late hoga.( I don't know, she will be late), replied the maid So Johar simply pushed the girl on the bed and mounted her. The girl protested. "Memsahib ayega to him boleyga" (When madam returns, I will tell her", and at the same time opened her legs to her mistress paramaour, "EVEN more bizarre was his story of how he bedded two sisters and their mother. One sister had been his mistress for some years before she left him to got married. She introduced her younger sister to Johar and asked him to sleep her get into films. He not only got her a few minor roles but also asked her to stay at his flat. One evening came back from the studios look ing very tired, asked her if she would like a hot cup of tea or something stronger to cheer her up. She replied, "if you really want to know what I would like best, I'd like a nice fuck." The girl left Johar to become a star. Her mother wrote to Johar to thank him for what he had done for her daughters and asked him if she could stay with him for a couple of days when visiting Bombay. One night she came to his bed, stark naked. "I did not want to hurt the old lady's feelings," wrote Johar, and "obliged her the same way I had obliged her daughters." How could I have published these memoirs without inviting the wrath of the proprietors of the journal on my head? Johar accused me of cowardice. I accused him of making up stories."
NEELAM Mahajan Singh has confined herself to the accounts. of only the above noted persons. She finds some of the passages in their life sketches as "obscene". She has reproduced them in paragraph 8 of her Writ petition. They run as under:
8.1.ABOUT Devyanichaubal "SHE went to the police station and lodged an F.I.R. against the two boys. The next morning she came to my office to tell me about the incident. With tears streaming down her eyes she repeated over and over again what the boys had threatened to do to her, "we'll bugger you bloody bitch till your fat bum is blue; we will f......till you scream for help".(page 8) "On another occasion she wrote a very bitchy piece on Dharmendra allegedly based on an interview he had given her. He was known to be a bit of a stud; Devyani's account made him out to be a superstud. She wrote about how he serviced two to three starlets every day in the studios before he returned home to do his "home work" on his wife's bed. Dharmendra was understandably very upset".
8.2ABOUT Indrani Aikath Gyaltsen "I thought Indrani was riding on cloud nine. But she was impatient for fame and money. We met at the Calcutta book fair. Her second novel Crane's Morning was due to be released that week. "Why don't people ask me for autographs? Why am I not as widely read as Sobha De? She asked me. I assured her that after she had published a few more novels, people would seek her out. And as for selling like Shobha De, I told her, "Put some fucking in your writing and you will be as widely read." She did not approve of my language. "I am not that kind of a writer," she replied with haughty disdain."
8.3AMRITA Shergil "SHE was said to have given appointments to her lovers at two hours interval before she retired for the night. If this was true (men's gossip is less reliable than women's) love formed very little part of Amrita's life. Sex was what mattered to her. She was a genuine case of nymphomania, and according to her nephew Vivian Sunderam's published account, she was also a lesbian. Her modus vivendi is vividly described by Badruddin Tyabji in his memories. One winter when he was staying in Simla he invited Amrita for dinner. He had a fire lit for protection from cold and European classical music playing on his gramophone. He wasted the first evening talking of literature and music. He invited her again. He had the same log fire and the same European classical music. Before he knew what was happening, Amrita simply took her cloths off and lay stark naked on the carpet. She did not behave in wasting time. Even the very proper Badruddin Tyabji got the message".
"HE was then in the prime of his youth - early 20s. In a week she had reduced him to a limp rag. "I could not cope with her," he admitted. " I was glad to get back to Calcutta."
"HERself-portraits were exercises in narcissism. She probably had as a nice a figure as she portrayed herself in his nudes but I had no means of knowing what she concealed beneath her sari. What I can't forget is her brashness."
8.4INDER Sain Johar "ONE night he had (or pretend to have) nightmares and started whimpering in his sleep. His aunt brought him to her bed. He snuggled into her bosom and soon had an erection. He tried to push it into her. She slapped him and told me to behave himself. The next morning he was afraid he would be scolded and sent back home. However, his aunt was sweetness itself. After her husband had left for his office, she offered to bathe him. While she was soaping him, he again got sexually aroused. This time his aunt taught him to what to do with it. It became his daily morning routine. Nevertheless, Johar confessed that in the years of his adolescence what he enjoyed most was being buggered by older boys."
"THE autobiography did not mention Rama but in the years after their separation he wrote of a starlet (now a star I won't name) whom he set up in a flat in Malabar Hill. Whenever he felt like it, he would drop in on her. One evening he was in a particularly horny mood. When he got to the lady's flat, he was informed by her young Goan maidservant, "Memsahib bahar gaya" (madam has gone out). "Kab ayega? (When will she return?) "Ky maloom? Bahut late hoga.( I don't know, she will be late), replied the maid So Johar simply pushed the girl on the bed and mounted her. The girl protested. "Memsahib ayega to him boleyga" (When madam returns, I will tell her", and at the same time opened her legs to her mistress paramaour, "EVEN more bizarre was his story of how he bedded two sisters and their mother. One sister had been his mistress for some years before she left him to got married. She introduced her younger sister to Johar and asked him to sleep her get into films. He not only got her a few minor roles but also asked her to stay at his flat. One evening came back from the studios look ing very tired, asked her if she would like a hot cup of tea or something stronger to cheer her up. She replied, "if you really want to know what I would like best, "I'd like a nice fuck". The girl left Johar to become a star Her mother wrote to Johar to thank him for what he had done for he daughters and asked him if she could stay with for a couple of days where visiting Bombay."
ARE these passages obscene?
LETus first know as to what is meant by the word "obscene". Dealing with the question the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of Ranjit D. Udeshi vs.State of Maharashtra quoted with approval a passage of Cockbun CJ. in Hicklin's case which laid down the test of obscenity in these words: "...Ithink the test of obscenity is this whether the tendency of the matter charged as obscenity is to deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open lo such immoral influences, and into whose hands a publication of this sort may fall. ...it is quite certain that it would suggest to the minds of the young of cither sex, or even to persons of more advanced years, thoughts of a most impure and libidinous character."
AND proceeded to observe that : "WHERE obscenity and art are mixed, art must be so preponderating as lo throw the obscenity into a shadow or the obscenity so trivial and insignificant that it can have no effect and may be overlooked. In other words, treating with sex in a manner offensive to public decency and morality (and these are the words of our Fundamental Law), judged of by our National standards and considered likely to pander to lascivious, prurient or sexually precocious minds, must determine the result. We need not attempt to bowdlerize all literate and thus rob speech and expression of freedom. A balance should be maintained between freedom of speech and expression and public decency and morality but when the latter is substantially transgressed the former must give way".
(10) The question again fell for consideration before the Supreme Court in the case of Chandrakant Kalyandas Kakodkar v. The State of Maharashtra and others . It said: "WE do not think that it can be said with any assurance that merely because adolescent youth read situation of the type presented in the book, they would become depraved, debased and encouraged to lasciviousness. It is possible that they may come across such situations in life and may have lo face them. But if a narration or description of similar situation is given in a setting emphasising a strong moral to be drawn from it and condemns the conduct of the erring party as wrong and loathsome it cannot be said that they have a likelihood of corrupting the morals of those in whose hands it is likely to fall particularly the adolescent."
AFTERKakodkar came the case of Samaresh Bose and another v. Amal Mitra and another and it guided as under: "IN our opinion, in judging the question of obscenity, the Judge in the first place should try to place himself in the position of the author and from the view point of the author the judge should try to understand what is it that the author seeks to convey and what the author conveys has any literary and artistic value. The Judge should thereafter place himself in the position of a reader of every age group in whose hands the book is likely to fall and should try to appreciate what kind of possible influence the book is likely to have in the minds of the readers. A Judge should thereafter apply his judicial mind dispassionately to decide whether the book in question can be said to be obscene within the meaning of S.292, Indian Penal Code . by an objective assessment of the book as a whole and also of the passages complained of as obscene separately. In appropriate cases, the Court tor eliminating any subjective element or personal preference which may remain hidden in the sub-conscious mind and may unconsciously affect a proper objective assessment, may draw upon the evidence on record and also consider the views expressed by reputed or recognised authors of literature on such questions if there be any for his own consideration and satisfaction to enable the Court to discharge the duty of making a proper assessment."
And: "ON a very anxious consideration and after carefully applying our judicial mind in making an objective assessment of the novel we do not think that it can be said with any assurance that the novel is obscene merely because slang and unconventional words have been used in the book in which there have been emphasis on sex and description of female bodies and there are the narrations of feelings, thoughts and actions in vulgar language. Some portions of the book may appear to be vulgar and readers of cultured and refined taste may feel shocked and disgusted. Equally in some portions, the I words used and description given may not appear to be in proper taste. In a some places there may have been an exhibition of bad taste leaving it to the readers of experience and maturity to draw the necessary inference but certainly not sufficient to bring home to the adolescents any suggestion which is depraving or lascivious. We have to bear in mind that the author has written this novel which came to be published in the Sarodiya Desh for all classes of readers and it cannot be right to insist that the standard should always be for the writer to see that the adolescent may not be brought into contact with sex. If a reference to sex by itself in any novel is considered to be obscene and not fit to be read by adolescents, adolescents will not be in a position to read me nel and "will have to read books which are purely religious."
(11) Though it may not be discernible in our country, disaffection with the law of obscenity is now well entrenched in England and the United States. While Lori Wldgery describes it as unsatisfactory, Lord Wilberforce proclaims it illogical and unscientific. Lord Denning rues it has misfired. Some are seen advocating even for pornography and raising their voice against obscenity laws. In any case one witnesses significant changes in today's social mores and attitudes.
(12) Today nudity and four-letter words have almost ceased to raise eyebrows. In 1936 a Bow Magistrate had found Radclyffe Hall's novel The Well of Loneliness a obscene because it dealt with lesbianism. The year 1974 saw it being read over the ail waves as a Bbc Book at Bedtime. In 1972 even the Times published a full-page advertisement featuring the profile of a naked model. Full-frontal nudity has been offered the arts pages of the Guardian and the Observer what to talk of provocative page-three "spreads" in the Sun and the Mirror The English fiction to which Indian reader is fill exposed, today treats physical passion as the most, or almost the most, important experience in life. The French literature treats, to a large extent, the sensual as thei whole of experience. And imagine the change. Only in 1884 Walter Besant which delivering a lecture at the Royal Institute, had congratulated English fiction on : morality by which the meant its failure to discuss sexual comments. We cannot thus judge Contemporary writing by the same standard of the past literature. Pound and Eliot committed that mistake when they went to London finding contemporary London greatly lacking: "Conduct, on the other hand, the soul 'Which the higher cultures have nourished." To fleet St.where Dr. Johnson flourished; Besides this thoroughfare The Sale of half hose has .. Long space superseded the cultivation Of Pierian roses."
(13) The realities of popular permissiveness are reflected in the judgments of the Supreme Court as well. Ranjit D.Udeshi's case talks of "new literary standards" and notices that the world has moved away from the times when "Pamela, Moll Flanders, Mrs.Warren's Profession" and even "Mill on the Floss" were considered immodest and that today all these and authors from Aristophanes to Zola are widely read. In Kakodkar's case (supra) it was said: "I Nearly English writings authors wrote only with unmarried girls in view but society has changed since then to allow literatures and artists to give expression to their ideas, emotions and objectives with full freedom except that it should not fall within the definition of "obscene" having regard to the standards of contemporary society in which it is read. The standards of contemporary society in India are also fast changing. The adults and adolescents have available to them a large number of classics, novels, stories and pieces of literature which have a content of sex, love and romance. As observed in Udeshi's case, if a reference to sex by itself is considered obscene, no books can be sold except those which are purely religious. In the field of art and cinema also the adolescent is shown situations which even a quarter of a century ago .would be considered derogatory to public morality, but having regard to changed conditions are more taken for granted .without in anyway tending to debase or debauch the mind."
(14) We find the same thought in the case of Samaresh Bose.
BUTthen, if the Supreme Court in Ranjit B. Udeshi's ease took note of the "new literary .standards," it also, at the same time, thought it fit to swear by the Hicklin Tests.
Asi will presently show, though the Supreme Court clearly said that it was refusing to "discard" those tests, it did deviate from them. For example, under the Hicklin test the effect upon the fourteen-year-old school girl still tended to be the criterion of obscenity. The Supreme Court instead of adopting that criterion rather talked of "those whose minds are open to influences of this sort and into whose hands the book is likely to fall". It appears to me that the Supreme Court in its subsequent pronouncements has further watered down the rigidity of the other tests. In the Hicklin test no account was taken of literary merit. Though in Ranjit D.Udeshi the Supreme Court following that test did not take into account the literary merit, in the case of Samaresh Bose it was clearly taken note of. Following the Hicklin tests it was earlier emphasised that the Judge alone is to decide the matter ruling out the consideration of literary opinion. In the case of Samaresh Bose the opinion of literary lions paraded by the defense was freely utilised. Most important, the Hicklin test does not specify that the work should be considered as a whole. However, the Supreme Court in Ranjit D.Udeshi stated: "An overall view of the obscene matter in the setting of the whole work would, of course, be necessary". But then, perhaps going back to the Hicklin tests it also stated: "obscene matter must be considered by itself and separately" to find out whether it is so gross and its obscenity so decided that it is likely to deprave and corrupt. This, as per some critics, provides a lever to the prosecutors to do their purple best with purple passages. But then what is significant to note is that in Samaresh Bose (supra) though the portions alleged to be obscene were taken note of, they were examined keeping in view the main theme and purpose of the novel and the social background of the concerned characters. Thus, though the Supreme Court refused to discard the Hicklin tests, they were not strictly adhered to even in Ranjit B. Udeshi's case and with the passage of time and without making a specific reference to them, the Supreme Court further diluted them reminding us of R v. Socker (1954) W.L.R. 1138 wherein Stable J. while dealing with "The Philanderer" a novel concerned with degeneration of a happily married man whose private insecurity derives him to sexual conquest, without detailed consideration of the law as stated in Hicklin moved briskly from the obligatory:
"IF in the course of this summing up I express my opinion about the matter, you are entitled to ignore it"
"BABIES of either sex are not born into the world dressed up in a frock-coat or an equivalent feminine garment."
"THROWINGone's mind back over the ages, the only real guidance we get about how people thought and behaved is in their contemporary literature.
"IF we are going to read novels about how things go in New York, it would not be of much assistance, would it, if contrary to the fact, we were led to suppose that in New York no unmarried woman or teenager has disabused her mind of the idea that babies are brought by storks or are sometimes found in cabbage patches or under gooseberry brushes? to The literature of the world from the earliest times, when people first learned to write literature sacred and profane, poetry and prose represents the sum total of human thought throughout the ages and from all the varied civilizations the human pilgrimage has traversed." "Are we going to say in England that our contemporary literature is to be measured by what is suitable for the fourteen/year/old schoolgirl to read?
15.And the jury duly acquitted.
(16) It is not that the Supreme Court alone has deviated from the rigours of the Hicklin test. The legislature too has intervened by amending section 292 of the Indian Penal Code. This amendment was carried out in the year 1969 by the Amendment Act 36 of 1969 and what is of significance is that all the three judgments of the Supreme Court referred to above relate to the period before the said amendment.
(17) After the amendment, sub-section (1) of section 292 took the following shape : "292(1).For the purpose of sub-section (2), a book, pamphlet, paper, writing, drawing, painting, representation, figure or any other object, shall be deemed to be obscene if it is lascivious or appeals to the prurient interest of if its effect, or (where it comprise two or more distinct items) the effect of any one of its items, is, if taken as a whole such as to tend to deprave and corrupt persons who are likely, having regard to all relevant circumstances, to read, see or hear the matter contained or embodied in it."
(18) Thus a book shall be deemed obscene if (a) it is lascivious or appeals to the prurient interest or (b) if its comprises of two or where it comprises of two or more distinct items, the effect of any one of its items, is, if taken as a whole such as to tend to deprave and corrupt persons who arc likely, having regard to all relevant circumstances, to read the matter contained in it. The words "if taken as a whole" arc of significance and show a departure from the earlier approach. "THE Women & Men in My Life" as a whole and so also the passages under attack have thus to be judged keeping in view not only the present day literary trends and standards but the present day popular permissiveness as well. The book is not a novel. It contains biographical narratives highlighting certain facets and characteristics of the individuals under examination. In dissecting them Khushwant Singh neither displays charity nor compassion. Rather, at places, he vents his scorn. It is also to be remembered that although it is frequently proclaimed that man is a rational creature, many of the things that human beings do could hardly be so characterised. The women and men in Khushwant Singh's Life are no different. By focussing on their behaviour he reveals their distinctive qualities. Here is Devyani Chaubal bold, brave and full of laughter, and yet what she wrote could be "malicious" and "very bitchy". Here is Indrani Aikath Gyaltsen a woman with all the comforts of life available at her elbow and yet so impatient for fame and money that she does not mind adopting even plagiarism as a ready tool to achieve her goal. His Amrita Shergil believes in sexual athleticism and treats sex as a battleground. She is the seducer, mad with sexuality and probably never satisfied. Meet his I.S. Johar, a sick and frightened man. His is the sexual expression of the boredom and depression in which his private and professional life had so sadly saturated. His autobiographical passages etc. are a pathetic attempt to provide a mask for the failures that were central to his life.
(19) I am sure, had Khushwant Singh not come out with the objected passages through his ironical and witty pen we would not have got the chance to enter and inhabit the real world of those persons.
(20) IT was probably Koestler who said that Indians have a notoriously ambivalent attitude towards sex. On the one hand the cult of lingam, the erotic temple carvings, the Kama sutra; and on the other, prudery, hypocrisy, lip service to the ideal of chastity combined with Spermal anxiety.[See: Mahatma Gandhi: Key to health.]
--- *** ---
(21) KHUSHWANT Singh has no place for such prudery and hypocricy. We may not sometimes agree with his choice of words. At places the language employed may have the tendency to shock or disgust but then revulsion is not corruption. Tendency to corrupt is a much stronger concept than a tendency to shock or disgust and implies the spread .of moral perversion. It is said that .moral principles are the creations of the special decisions taken from time to time by human beings and they will differ, .or may differ, according to the particular circumstances in which they are created. In 1907 Methnen & Co. published a volume of New Poems by Herbert Trench. 1960 saw a first edition of these poems "improved' by Sir Max Beerbohm. In 1907 the printer dared not print the word Hell in full, and Max takes over :.ls1 (22) Appolo : Unkennelled H-11 was loose And swarmed in escalade Seaman: You say, Aitch, hyphen, double ell D'you mean that word that rhymes with Nell? Dickens' heroin, Little Nell? Appollo: Your question is indelicate, Your curiosity too great, Just what I mean, I dare not state.
(23) KHUSHWANT Singh has dared to state. His book does not read like Anne .Bradsheet's poem "To My Dear Children" or like the life story of Elizabeth Ashbridge, a Quaker woman missionary. His are life stories of new styles of life challenging traditional social norms and values, What he has stated has to be tested by the current standards of ordinary decent people. I say so because the book being in English and with a high price tag is likely to be read only by well-educated persons in high income bracket like the petitioner herself. Some of them may find some stray words or passages shocking or disgusting but not obscene. Even the petitioner only felt aghast and shocked. This does not prove obscenity. Let us also not forget that freedom of expression requires adequate "breathing space". I do riot think Khushwant Singh has crossed the permissible limits. The question of violation of right to privacy, dignity, fair treatment or reputation as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution thus also does not arise. In any case right of privacy under Article 21 is enforceable only qua the State.
(24) THE petition is disposed with order, as to costs.
Comments
Post a Comment