| How Can I Help ? | Site Search | Photo Gallery | Contact |
 

 

Who is a “Goonda?”
Gayathri Viswanathan, Chennai

The Hindu newspaper gives the following definition of people who are typically arrested under the Goonda's Act -

"According to the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Slum grabbers Act 1982, a "goonda" is a person who, either by himself or as a member of a gang, habitually commits or attempts to commit or abets the commission of offences punishable under the IPC. Recently, it was amended to bring video pirates under its purview. Under the Act, "acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order... means activities which affect adversely, or are likely to affect adversely, the maintenance of public order."

The key phrase here is "habitually" - according to hyper dictionary, these are the synonyms given for "habitually" : again and again, as a rule, as per usual, as things go, as usual, chiefly, chronically, commonly, consistently, customarily, frequently, generally, in many instances, inveterately, mainly, many a time, many times, most often, mostly, naturally, normally, normatively, not infrequently, not seldom, oft, often, often enough, oftentimes, ofttimes, ordinarily, persistently, prescriptively, recurringly, regularly, repeatedly, repetitively, routinely, to be expected, unseldom, usually, whenever you wish, wontedly.

How can Sri Sundaresa Iyer and Sri Raghu, who have just been remanded to custody once, on a case that has been nearly declared as flimsy in the Supreme Court, who have no previous police record (not even petty offences) be declared to be a “Goonda” - a person who "again and again" commits acts punishable under IPC? This when, innumerous "real" goondas are roaming free with charge sheets as long as their arm and persons who have been under trial for committing heinous act like murder can become a MP or an MLA?

In normal language, a goonda is a person, when let go out of custody is likely to return to his nefarious ways and cause harm to public (people / property). This is usually discerned based on previous history and the persona of the person charged. In what way do the Judges decide that Sri Raghu or Sri Sundaresa Iyer are going to cause public harm? What is the need for invoking the Goonda's act on them? Are the learned judges in our country unable to distinguish this difference?


>>


 


© Copyright kanchi-sathya.org
No part of this web site may be reproduced without explicit permission from the webmaster.
Some material put up on this web site are protected by individual copyrights of the concerned organisations.
This site is optimised for 800 x 600 resolution or higher.