Spuriosity Killed The Katju

The old proverb about cats and curiosity has been around since Shakespearean times. It was used in a different form then and only in early 20th century has it come to be used in its current form. It is meant to warn of the dangers of unnecessary investigation and crossing certain lines. The first known usage of the proverb in a newspaper was on March 4, 1916 in The Washington Post as it quoted a report from the NewYork World titled “Four Departments of NewYork City Government Summoned to Rescue Feline”. Here’s how the story ran:

So poor Blackie died! In this day and age, though, curiosity is encouraged and doesn’t kill all that much. It’s spuriousity that kills. That’s right, especially when it comes to airing views in newspapers and on TV supported, not by facts, but by spurious theories. Justice Katju (JK) does cross the line of indecency when he frequently attacks Narendra Modi with spurious theories, analogies and untruths. In response to JK’s latest spurious piece in The Hindu I had written “Justice for 10000 killed in Gujarat 2002”. I had put him in the same basket as Aakar Patel and Ram Guha. I am often advised by good friends and well-wishers that JK is best ignored. You see, to ignore JK is like a woman mistaking a lump on the breast for a boil. Aakar Patel and Ram Guha are boils and can be ignored as they go away in some time. JK is no boil, he’s a lump that can turn out cancerous because he was a judge in the SC and still holds a statutory office. Aakar and Guha are, at best, street hawkers (my apologies to sincere, hard-working hawkers). This is the reason Arun Jaitley chose not to ignore him and provided one of the most stinging responses ever seen in writing from a politician.

I am a man who not only supports free speech but absolute free speech. The morons who believe JK is merely exercising his right to free speech are mistaken. He has been given the opportunity to speak at various functions and write in various newspapers more because he’s the PCI chairman at not because he’s a former judge or individual of great wisdom. They also do not ask if JK’s writings and utterances are motivated. And he uses these opportunities to propagate his spuriousity. Let’s just go through a few samples.

Despite being a judge who would be expected to care for facts JK still chose to peddle fake and unverified numbers of Muslims killed in Gujarat 2002 in his article. And, of course, he makes readers believe only Muslims were killed and not Hindus. If this is not political tinkering, what is? On February 18 in a chat with Rahul Kanwal and Meenakshi Lekhi on Headlines Today JK used more spurious nonsense to defend himself. He cited women’s bellies being slashed and ripped and burnt. This gory tale doesn’t come from anywhere but appears to be from Arundhati Roy’s wonder world of fiction. I had quoted the whole fake story of Suzy Roy in “SC exposes media’s clean shit” after the SC didn’t accept Zakia Jafri’s petition against Modi. For her bogus story in Outlook magazine, Arundhati had apologised but JK uses similar stories without an iota of evidence. Is he fit to be the PCI chairman? When told that Modi has been elected by people, JK nonchalantly says “we all know how elections are won”. Is he suggesting all elections in India are also spurious or is it only when it comes to Modi? The only major case of election-fraud in a court is not related to Modi but to P. Chidambaram.

In addition to the bellies-ripped story, JK also cites the killing of Ehsan Jafri as a planned attack. It took Meenakshi Lekhi to point out to him that leading the killers of Jafri was not a BJP man but a Congress MLA called Meghsingh Chaudhary. To all the criticism JK grandly claims that he has not only criticised BJP but also Congress. In support of this argument, the moron claims he criticised Maharashtra CM Prithviraj Chavan. Alright, but what was the criticism for? Corruption? Irrigation scam? Nope! The criticism was for 800 journalists being attacked by policemen for undertaking some protest. Does it take anyone to tell this idiot that speaking up for journalists’ rights is part of his job and can’t be compared to wanton and unprovoked criticism of Narendra Modi or any other CM? He is supposed to be a former judge but cannot see logic as clear as daylight. Again, this is quite a spurious defence. Moreover, he threatens Chavan with dismissal under Article 356. Jaitley rightly asks the question if the guy is bestowed with such powers. It’s, unfortunately, JK who has been acting like Hitler.

I doubt anyone in the media or any observer would deny that the campaign against Modi was the biggest witch-hunt in India. The hunters who participated benefited financially, in position and in influence. There is no reason not to criticise Modi but it is the proportions and usage of spurious information and analogies that make JK look more like Teesta Setalvad or Mallika Sarabhai. I wonder if he also dances as Mallika does. I have no hesitation in calling JK a potentially dangerous lump on the breast for more reasons. In his interview with TimesNow Jaitley mentioned how as Law Minister he had experienced senior judges on the verge of retirement clamouring for post-retirement postings. He also mentioned that some judgements just around the pre-retirement phase could be affected by such lust. With his open political campaign that is intended to benefit the Congress party, JK now has people wondering about the conduct and motives of judges themselves. By his conduct and utterances JK has pushed people into wondering if judges are above political persuasions when they are in office. This is the dangerous lump on the breast that cannot be ignored. In my previous post I have not attributed any motives to JK’s biased, prejudiced and spurious articles and nor have any of his critics in the current episode. However, grapevine in Delhi is a big business and gossip and rumour are staple diet for journalists. How does JK explain this piece that appeared in the Sunday Guardian? Is this smoke without any fire?

The bimbos in our media who have been talking of freedom of speech have not asked JK a single question about this article. JK claims his articles and balderdash are written as a private citizen and not as PCI chairman. The Hindu article signs him off as former judge and PCI chairman and doesn’t anywhere carry a disclaimer stating these are his “personal” opinions as journals often do with controversial figures. Even JK’s Twitter account @KatjuPCI has PCI tagged to it. Is he tweeting as a private citizen or as PCI chairman? How does one know? Or is it a fake account? In which case he should have protested to Twitter. His profile also mentions his position and not that his tweets are personal opinions. In my earlier post on this topic I had wrongly mentioned JK has an opinion on everything under Pluto. No Mr. JK, it seems your favourite planet is Uranus.

For all the corruption and scams that the Congress has been mired in, JK doesn’t have much to say about it. His conduct and frequent outbursts and outrage does make one worry about the conduct of our judges. In recent times SC judges have received postings on various statutory bodies immediately on retirement. There isn’t any cooling period post retirement anymore. Meenakshi Lekhi pointed another important aspect of JK’s behaviour and political persuasions. With so much of bias and prejudice against the BJP, particularly Narendra Modi, how can a member of this party who has a complaint to be heard by the PCI chairman ever expect him to be fair and impartial? This alone is good enough reason for JK to resign or to be sacked.

The funniest part is that of all the people in the Congress party guess who rushes to defend JK? Yeah, it’s not just ironical but a good laugh. It’s Abhishek Singhvi, the man caught on camera in his chambers. Consequently, the SC Bar Association passed a resolution not to engage the services of Singhvi. There you go Mr. JK, a tainted lawyer is the only one to defend you and that says a lot, doesn’t it? Mind you, this Congress is the very same party that asked Anna Hazare to join politics if he wants to protest and criticise the govt or politicians. Anna is neither a former judge nor holds any statutory office. Yet, the Congress spokesman feels JK can keep mouthing nonsense and keep writing politically motivated articles.

The awful truth also is that without the “justice” tag, without the “PCI Chairman” tag and most of all, without the “anti-Modi” tag JK wouldn’t be allowed to write in the media. Not just writing, being anti-Modi is like a license to write with spurious analogies and information. This time everyone called JK’s bluff. It looks like the cats may survive their nine lives but spuriousity certainly killed the Katju.