akshay gupta

Morality and Law

Posted by akshay gupta on in News and current affairs

Hello people

Law as has defined by numerous scholars but to no awail. Everybody has a different definition of law and everybody perceives law in a different sense. However, for everbody one aspect of law is common ie laws govern a society. It is for the people. However, i would like to draw the attention of the people towards the immoral conditions mentioned in the Bombay Anti Begging Law that applies to Delhi, Mumbai and Kolkatta. Under the act there are conditions that can punish the beggar for a maximum imprisonment of 10 years. I would like to post this question to you all, is it moral to punish a person who is suffering from poverty and has no means of acquiring the basic neccesities of life ie food. There are numerous examples of the same when a person was picked up.

This although might appear trivial but don’t such people have a right to live? They are put behind the bars, cramped in the imsufficient spaces in Social Welfare Homes. I do realise that in the social welfare homes they are taught vocational skills which might help them to earn a decent living after being released from the homes, but again the same question is it their fault that they are born poor??Is it moral to curbe their basic or the fundamental right to live with dignity, enjoy freedom just because they are shabbily dressed or they can’t acquire the funds require to own a home or are not educated enough to earn a decent living for themselves? Why do we rich and the people with money think they are a blot on the face of the metros??

The Delhi Government has started a drive to remove the beggars from the streets of Delhi and have started to deport them back to their native states. How is this decision different from the acts of MNS in Mumbai?? This contention was raised by a famous activist Mr. Harsh Mandher in a PIL. What about the fundamental right mentioned in the Constitution of India which gives freedom to any citizen of India to settle in any part of India and to take up any occupation. Now is this decision of the Delhi government which has the ascent of the Delhi High Court.

Comments

Anonymous 2 Feb 2010, 19:07
+1 -0
To have a closer introspection to your views ( which is no doubt ethical ) , u cannot consider begging as an occupation in real sense because it lacks the element of reciprocity. Secondly, to lead a life as a beggar, cannot be considered to be living with human dignity . Moreover, when a beggar comes to me at traffic signal and pulls my shirt while I m in an auto-rickshaw, I feel irritated and harassed , although I know that the person did not have food ( that is what he says ) for the last two days.

Our beloved and highly respected Constitution did not give him" the right to disturb me" at traffic signals . However, I dont mind buying a handkerchief or incense sticks from a person who comes to me during traffic jam . That is an example of right to "occupation" and "living with dignity".

But, one thing which I really felt bad and think it to be a wrong step was the MCD's decision to remove the shelter from 100 odd people at Pusa road during the severe winter of Delhi . They should have made proper arrangements before removing them , it lead to death of one person also.

Being a welfare state, the govt. should be more effective in taking new initiatives for the poorer sections of the society.
akshaywantsu 2 Feb 2010, 22:43
+0 -0
I agree with you when you say that our constitution doesn't give him the right to disturb your peace. I also get the same feeling when some 'useless jerk' ( I am purposefully using such a phrase) comes up to me and bothers me. I also think the way you do when they come up to me and ask for alms. But here in this post I am not concerned with the individualistic approach of the people in general, but I intend to question the barbaric conditions mentioned under the Act. I wish to have a discussion on the decisions of the Delhi government and the legislation makers which have included punishments like imprisonment for a maximum 10 years...I mean isn;t that too long a time to punish for a petty crime (even if you consider it one)

Also I agree that begging is not a profession. But I want to ask you a simple question- what does a beggar do? He has no means of survival. He is neither educated nor has any skills (if you leave a few exceptions who want a easy way). But such people always end up getting away without ever being caught. A simple google of the topic would give innumerable instances for the same. The people who are caught are not always beggars but also road side dealers engaging in some small activities like having a stall or something. No I am sure that comes under the purview of a 'right to occupation' and 'right to live with dignity' under the constitution.
Anonymous 3 Feb 2010, 01:51
+0 -0
See as far as the legislation is concerned, indeed it has features which are draconian in nature. I also agree with you . I wish you all the best for your endeavours .

But, tell me one thing - dont you think their are ample opportunities in our country for unskilled labourers ? The way he approaches a person for relief , in the same way cant he approach somebody for a day's labour and earn his bread ? Then that immediately becomes an occupation as well as brings his dignity to live . I often see my elderly neighbours engage beggars in gardening or make them clean the water tank and then pay them .

In villages , microloans starting from Rs. 200 are given to individuals without any security at minimum interest, so that they can do business. These are the few ways in which a beggar can be provided with some relief . This will also discourage him from begging.
Commenting is closed for this article.