Equal relief for five bereaved families
Editor,
I write this after reading Salil Gewali’s touching letter, “Lapalang tragedy: a story of bravery and loss” published in the Shillong Times on 21st July. I urge the Government of Meghalaya to provide prompt and equal financial support to the families of all five victims without discrimination.
The rescuers Sunil and Umesh Thakuri, who belonged to the same family, also died in the toxic gas leak. They were not part of the workplace but were neighbours who rushed in to save the three labourers purely on humanitarian grounds. Their courage deserves the highest appreciation from all of us.
The three labourers lost their lives because they were compelled to work in risky conditions to feed their families in the face of unemployment, which is ultimately the responsibility of the government. The authorities must ensure that full financial support is released quickly and interim relief is provided to meet immediate needs. Each bereaved family should also be given employment opportunities on humanitarian grounds.
I fully agree with Gewali’s view that senior journalist Patricia Mukhim always speaks out whenever humanitarian emergencies arise. Influential people are often too busy to extend such selfless support, and my deep respect goes to Kong Patricia for her compassion.
Yours etc.,
H. Umdor,
Shillong -8
Traffic Congestion in the Fire Brigade Area
Editor,
Through the columns of your esteemed newspaper, I would like to draw the attention of the concerned authorities to the increasing traffic congestion in the Fire Brigade area of Shillong.
One of the main causes of the traffic jam, especially for vehicles coming from the Nongthymmai side, is the queue of vehicles waiting to enter the petrol pump. Many vehicles are allowed to park or wait along the roadside near the petrol pump until their turn comes to refuel. This significantly narrows the road and obstructs the smooth flow of traffic.
Another major cause is vehicles coming from the Laitumkhrah side making a right turn into the petrol pump. These vehicles often stop in the middle of the road while waiting for a gap in the oncoming traffic, resulting in long queues and severe congestion during peak hours.
I sincerely request the Traffic Police and the concerned authorities to take appropriate measures, such as regulating vehicle queues at the petrol pump, restricting roadside waiting, and improving traffic management at this junction. These steps would greatly help reduce congestion and ensure smoother traffic movement for all commuters.
I hope the concerned authorities will take prompt action in the interest of the public.
Yours etc.,
James M Laloo
Shillong -14
Formalities Regarding the EWS Certificate
Editor,
I am writing regarding the procedure for obtaining an EWS certificate issued by the DC’s Office, Shillong, which can be applied for online.
While submitting the online application, applicants are required to upload various documents, including mark sheets from nursery to the highest qualification obtained, the birth certificate, affidavits, the headman’s certificate, and other relevant documents.
After submitting the online application, applicants must undergo police verification, during which police personnel visit the applicant’s residence, verify the documents, and conduct an interview. Applicants are also required to submit hard copies of all the documents at this stage.
Thereafter, applicants must attend an interview with the concerned officer at the DC’s Office, where they are again required to submit photocopies of the same documents. The entire process is time-consuming and takes many months to obtain the certificate.
I would like to offer the following suggestions:
For the renewal of an EWS certificate, applicants should not be required to submit the same detailed documents repeatedly. A minimal list of essential documents should be prescribed for renewals.
The process of issuing the certificate should be completed within a shorter time frame. If necessary, additional staff may be engaged to ensure timely delivery of certificates.
The documents uploaded during the online application process should be made accessible to the Police Department and the concerned officer conducting the interview. This would eliminate the need for repeated submission of hard copies, reduce paper consumption, and contribute to environmental conservation.
Yours etc.,
Name withheld on request
Via email
Supreme Court Says Using Vulgar Language Not Obscene
Editor,
It is an accepted fact that words uttered in anger are seldom elegant and such words may be rude, offensive, and even shocking but there is a vital distinction between what is merely vulgar and what is legally obscene. By drawing that distinction with clarity, the Supreme Court has performed an important service to both free speech and the criminal justice system. The use of swear words, profanities, and vulgar expletives is certainly not a mark of civility.
Such language is distasteful and has no place in courteous public discourse. However, human beings are not always calm or rational. Heated arguments often produce words that would never have been spoken after reflection. The law has long recognised this difference between impulsive conduct and deliberate wrongdoing. A murder committed in a sudden fit of rage attracts a different degree of culpability from one that is meticulously planned. The same principle should inform the criminalisation of speech.
It is in this context that the apex court’s recent judgement assumes significance. A bench headed by Justice Sanjay Karol interpreted Section 294 (b) of the Indian Penal Code and its corresponding provision in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, which deals with obscene acts and utterances.
The case arose from a land dispute in Tamil Nadu in which one party repeatedly hurled a notorious four-letter abuse at another during a quarrel in 2017. The court rightly held that merely using foul language does not automatically amount to obscenity. Quoting from the dictionary it reiterated that obscenity must satisfy the “community standards test”.
The expression must be lascivious, appeal to prurient interests, and have the tendency to deprave and corrupt those who hear or read it. It must also genuinely cause annoyance to others, said the court
In the said case the words used by the now 70-year-old accused were described, “at best, abusive or vulgar in nature,” falling well short of the legal threshold of obscenity. The ruling is consistent with earlier judicial pronouncements, recognising that obscenity is not a fixed concept. Standards of morality evolve with time and vary across societies. Customs, traditions, social background, and the setting in which words are spoken all influence whether something is obscene. The court has also consistently distinguished vulgarity from obscenity. Vulgarity may evoke disgust or revulsion, but obscenity is something that corrupts morals and appeals to prurient instincts.
The changing fortunes of Lady Chatterley’s Lover illustrate how society’s perceptions of obscenity evolve over time. The judgement should serve as a reminder to the police that criminal law is not a weapon for punishing every instance of bad manners. Offensive language deserves social disapproval, but only speech that crosses the carefully defined legal threshold should invite criminal prosecution. Such restraint is essential in a democracy that values both decency and freedom of expression.
Yours etc.,
Yash Pal Ralhan,
Via email
