Imagine the frustration and ire of not having your salary paid for months at a time. Now imagine being sexually harassed and physically abused when you ask your employer to cough up your outstanding dues. Sounds unbelievable, right?

This is what happened to a group of women civic workers in Bengaluru recently. In Bengaluru's KR Puram area, women sanitation workers and garbage collectors -- called pourakarmikas -- haven't been paid their salaries by the contractor who hired them on behalf of the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) for the last three months. When the women protested and demanded that he pay them their money, he not only abused them with casteist slurs, but also sexually harassed them by taking his pants off in their presence and threatening to rape them, reported The News Minute.

The contractor allegedly told the women, "Your wages are in my pants, come and take it," according to a report in Times Of India,

Enraged, the women complained to their union. On hearing their plight, the union filed complaints with the BBMP Sexual Harassment Committee and the Karnataka Social Welfare Department.

But even impending legal trouble did not deter the brazen contractor from further harassing the women. When he heard of the complaint, on Thursday, the contractor, Nagesh, allegedly again threatened the workers with the help of local goons.

"The contractor brought five local goons along with him who were carrying rods and threatened the pourakarmikas. He even got hold of one of the pourakarmikas and beat her with the rod," TNM quoted Maitree, a member of Alternative Law Forum, the group representing the workers, as saying.

According to the workers, the contractor was able to get away with such deplorable behaviour because he had the support of a BBMP health inspector.

Following the incident on Thursday, a complaint has been registered against Nagesh and three others, an Akshaya, a Nandeesh and a Shadeek, by the KR Puram police under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including Section 354A (outraging the modesty of a woman) and Section 3(1)(J) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

"We asked complainants to give statements in writing. Based on allegations and statements, we registered FIR against Nagesh and three others. We will summon the accused immediately for questioning and initiate legal action on finding them guilty," TOI reported a KR Puram police official as saying.

According to the workers, the contractor was able to get away with such deplorable behaviour and non-payment of dues because he had the support of a BBMP health inspector, Ramakrishna.

Meanwhile, Bengaluru's mayor, Sampath Raj, said that he will ensure that strict action is taken against the guilty party while condemning the incident. "The safety of its workers is of utmost importance to the BBMP. I have directed the concerned BBMP officials to look into the matter. If he is found guilty, then we will ensure that his contract license is suspended. I have also spoken with the concerned health officer as there were allegations that he was supporting the contractor," TNM quoted Raj as saying.

This is not the first time that Bengaluru's pourakarmikas have banded together against contractors and BBMP over terrible working conditions and unfair wages. On 28 August, the city's 20,000 sanitation workers went on a 36-hour strike demanding that their wages for the last three months be paid before they would go back to work. They also complained that contractors refused all their leaves and forced them to work even when they were sick, according to an NDTV report.

Before that, in June, thousands of waste management workers went on strike demanding that their services be regularised and direct payment from BBMP. The mayor had conceded their demands, effectively eliminating the middle-men or the contractors notorious for harassing these workers. Direct payment to pourakarmikas was supposed to start from 1 September, but was soon postponed to October 1, because ground level verification of the names mentioned in the pourakarmika rolls had to be completed before the money was disburses.

Also on HuffPost

Transportation minister Nitin Gadkari made an announcement recently that India will switch completely to electric vehicles by 2030. Bold indeed! The earlier initiative from 2015 called Faster Adoption and Manufacture of (Hybrid and) Electric vehicles (FLAME) seems to have failed to take off. But Mr. Gadkari said this time he will just bulldoze his way through. Considering that India imports over 80% of its crude oil at a cost of over $80 billion, and air pollution is now blamed for over 1 million premature deaths per year, this transformation would be a giant step towards energy security and air quality improvements of unprecedented levels.

While the United States saw an increase in the sale of bigger vehicles due to the drop in crude oil prices over the last few years, the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government chose to keep petrol and diesel prices the same or even slightly higher during these cheap crude oil years. The additional revenues have largely gone to reducing the fuel-subsidies and to deal with the slowdown in economic growth. The brave initiative to switch completely to electric vehicles will obviously face many social and political challenges. All climate actions that require disruptive socio-technical transitions will face hurdles, some expected and some unexpected. The expected resistance will come from established industries and institutions that stand to lose, and the entrenched behavioral patterns of citizens whose pocketbooks or ways of life get hit by these transitions.

'Creative destruction' to destabilise the old structures is as critical as the innovation, and adoption of the new.

The good news for India's transition to all-electric-vehicles is that charging stations have already popped up in states such as Karnataka and Maharashtra due to their early adoption of electric vehicles for government fleets. Cab services like Ola have also announced their plans to switch to electric vehicles. Some auto-manufacturers have also taken steps towards increasing the production of electric cars and two-wheelers. The cost of batteries and battery charges have seen a significant global reduction while charging speeds as well battery quality have gone up. Companies like Tesla are already salivating at the idea of capturing the Indian electric car market share.

Several policies and incentives have been put forth for facilitating the transition such as the subsidies for hybrid and electric bikes and cars by the National Electric Mobility Mission Plan. While most of the sociotechnical transition plans focus on policies and incentives to drive adoption and innovation towards the new technologies, much less attention is paid towards strategies to dismantle the old technologies. The so-called 'creative destruction' to destabilise the old structures is as critical as the innovation and adoption of the new.

For example, manufacturing and marketing, the workforce, education/training and R&D that support petrol and diesel vehicles cannot simply be wished away by 2030. Planned phasing out of this massive infrastructure is as critical if nst more so, as simultaneously driving the innovation for manufacturing, training a new workforce or retraining much of the existing workforce, mental models to drive large-scale adoption of electric vehicles as well as the infrastructure for electricity production, charging stations, smarter grids, and better and cheaper batteries as well as their recycling.

Unplanned transitions can create long-lasting trauma, the worst case being the mine closures in the UK which have left persistent social problems due to a failure to retrain the mine workers

Unplanned transitions can create long-lasting trauma, the worst case being the mine closures in the UK which have left persistent social problems due to a failure to retrain the mine workers. Some of the current global backlash against immigration, and the swing to the Right in election outcomes are blamed on socio-technical transitions that have not included appropriate policy mixes for creative destruction of the old while transitioning to the new. The framework provided for deep decarbonisation also apply to the many socio-technical transitions India must undergo to live up to its commitments to the Paris Agreement.

The planned transition to electric vehicles may offer a golden opportunity to focus on combining the positive incentives to drive consumers, corporations, local and state governments towards them, with policies and subsidies to transition out of using petrol and diesel vehicles. Removing the subsidies that already exist for petrol/diesel vehicles is obviously the first task. But unintended consequences must be kept in mind. For example: diesel vehicles are now the main mode of transporting food and grains which means the transition to electric vehicles must ensure that food prices are not affected adversely, especially for the poor.

Large-scale social acceptance will require business support as well as efforts to raise awareness of co-benefits such as cleaner air, water and food.

The challenge of the cost, quality, comfort, and maintenance of electric vehicles can hardly be underestimated. As of now, fewer than 25,000 electric vehicles are sold annually but the drop in price expected in the coming years will bump up demand. Past transitions have relied on different but interdependent innovations. Renewable energy advances and its large-scale adoption can combine with novel battery technologies, smart grids, increased electric vehicle demand with supportive policies and subsidies, as well new business models may work as a game-changer for the transition to electric vehicles.

But the government needs to proactively facilitate the synergy of innovations and policies needed for making electric vehicles an attractive alternative, while also driving the creative destruction of the petrol/diesel vehicles as a way of life. Large-scale social acceptance will require business support as well as efforts to raise awareness of co-benefits such as cleaner air, water and food. And a broader discourse on the positive outcomes of a low-carbon economy in terms of global competitiveness and quality of life in addition to standards of living.

Climate policies can benefit from technological innovations which offer solutions and accelerate the green spiral.

Externalities such as unforeseen increases in oil prices or a bottom-up demand on improving air quality may well become important players in this sociotechnical transition. Climate policies can benefit from technological innovations which offer solutions and accelerate the green spiral which can lead to positive feedback of green industries coming together to expand the low-carbon coalition. Such bottom-up coalitions of businesses and societies can make climate action resilient to political setbacks: the continued climate actions by some states in the US under the Trump-administration being a prime example.

India thus need not rely simply on bans and regulations to enforce the transition to electric vehicles, or any of the other transitions necessary to keep abreast of its INDC targets. It can adopt a strategic mix of policies, incentives, regulations and subsidies to drive a smooth and equitable transition. Investments in science and technology education will also need to drive innovations and entrepreneurship to support such transitions, as well train a globally-aware workforce. This workforce will continue to exploit the green markets as well as it has cashed in on IT and other outsourcing. The switch to electric vehicles can thus be a golden opportunity.

The opinions expressed in this post are the personal views of the author. They do not necessarily reflect the views of HuffPost India. Any omissions or errors are the author's and HuffPost India does not assume any liability or responsibility for them.

Hollywood mega producer Harvey Weinstein's uncontrollable libido has opened a veritable Pandora's jocks. Suddenly, actor Ben Affleck is compelled to issue a public apology to Hilarie Burton , courtesy a freak social media conversation, for a crude fondle in Y 2003. Angelina Jolie and Gwyneth Paltrow have given explicit descriptions of Mr Weinstein's lascivious attempts at forced seduction. Weinstein has been compelled to resign from his lofty towers, and several of his chums have, belatedly, expressed their disgust. It is appalling alright, but those who are feigning ignorance of such organised smuttiness occurring regularly in high places, are clearly being terribly disingenuous.

Incidentally, showbiz globally has the ignoble tradition of the notorious casting couch, sexual favors are often extracted by powerful studio moguls from susceptible starlets, and handsome young men looking for that elusive breakthrough into the stardust lights. Sexual harassment is the elephant in the room, unfortunately, it is fashionable to treat it as a one-off done by some crazy pervert only.

The hard truth is that women across the globe have a formidable challenge even after cracking the glass ceiling by entering corporate boardrooms. The problem is deeply embedded in traditionalism bordering on irrational rigidity that proscribes women's emancipation. There are three examples that come to mind: India's own forensic expert Dr Rukmani Krishnamurthy, and Nobel Prize laureate Elizabeth Blackburn, a molecular biologist, who were told early in their school days: 'what's a nice girl like you doing studying science?'

The hard truth is that women across the globe have a formidable challenge even after cracking the glass ceiling by entering corporate boardrooms.

Clearly, for every Sheryl Sandberg there are a thousand other talented women who are being outrageously segregated against on account of gender prejudice. It is a grave issue, and there are no silver bullets to a historical bias of astonishing proportions. But there is hope.

At the CII Women Nation Summit in Mumbai last week, it was good to see a huge crowd of young women sharing stories of their unique triumph against sturdy walls of stubborn male resistance. Actor-director and talent powerhouse Lilette Dubey was forthright in stating that the Indian film industry was a hotbed of brazen exploitation by unscrupulous producers. Weinstein is in glorious company, only, we in India have the masterful wherewithal to smother stories that cause acute discomfort. Frankly, even the Indian media has a peculiar self-righteousness in dealing with the sexual shenanigans of the rich and famous. It is silly, and worse, crocodilian. While Bollywood's clandestine dalliances regularly feature in Page 3 columns, the licentious tales of corporate titans, political heavyweights, and several from the media industry are quietly buried.

Remember Bill O'Reilly, the TV anchor of Fox News? I asked this question to some, and the response has swerved between being self-serving to sanctimonious balderdash. For instance, "as long as the public figure delivers on fundamental commitments, how does it matter what they do between the bedsheets?". Really? In that case should the global media have ignored the hormonal outpourings of the former IMF honcho Dominique Strauss Kahn in the Sofitel hotel in New York, who was indicted for attempted rape of a surprised housekeeping staff ? France lost a potentially strong presidential candidate.

The double-standards here protect the roving eye of the powerful glitterati, as the unfortunate victims are subjected to astronomical intimidation, including threats.

Then, why at all feature those silly pieces on who is the latest victim of Salman Khan's charm offensive? Surely, that has little to do with his acting prowess on the big screen, right? Or do the ROTFL somersault on reading Bill Clinton jokes about his Monica Lewinsky moment? Why was there no chai pe charcha on a famous unmarried Indian politician who has a foster son-in-law? Was that a biological revolution? The double-standards here protect the roving eye of the powerful glitterati, as the unfortunate victims are subjected to astronomical intimidation, including threats. A journalist in a dangerous alleged liaison with a former NDA minister was killed. Frankly, the media becomes accessory to the crime by not reporting it.

Whatever be the truth, the overwhelming sentiment being cleverly choreographed is that actor Kangana Ranaut 's allegations against colleague Hrithik Roshan is a figment of imagination of a troubled head. It's not that simple. Would Ranaut risk being seen as a self-destructive psycho in an industry so solipsistic about its perceived halo that it seeks public approbation even on the shoes they wear? You wonder, sometimes.

Gender bias is a global problem

While it is indisputably a humongous social problem in India, gender bias is not restricted to geographical boundaries. The incorrigible superbrat John McEnroe mocked Serena Williams' extraordinary triumphs, saying a lowly ranked male player could demolish her. Perhaps he forgot the result of the Battle of the Sexes game between Billie Jean King and Bobby Riggs. Equal pay continues to incapacitate corporate HR in well-established multinational firms even with liberal predilections.

And while Shah Rukh Khan's decision to have his female co-star rank higher than him on the film rubric is welcome, we are still stuck in the quagmire of hollow sloganeering like 'Beti Bachao'. This is just such synthetic symbolism stretched too far. The reality is disturbing, worrisome. At least there are celluloid aspirations that signal rising woman power: an all-female star cast for Star Trek, a Wonder Woman franchise , and creative talent in India like Zoya Akhtar, Nandita Das, Gauri Shinde and Alia Bhatt are pushing the boundaries.

I read that former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright said: "There is a special place in hell for women who do not help each other". Hillary Clinton will probably agree. In the meantime , there are several predatory Weinstein's still walking around with a belligerent countenance in their five-star bathrobes. One braggadocio of the same ilk is today the most powerful man in the world. He was elected.

The opinions expressed in this post are the personal views of the author. They do not necessarily reflect the views of HuffPost India. Any omissions or errors are the author's and HuffPost India does not assume any liability or responsibility for them.

by Soumi Kundu

A health screening of adolescent girls and young women in Gumla district of Jharkhand showed that 90% of them were anemic, and had less than normal blood components. The study was conducted by Public Health Foundation of India (PHFI) on a random sample of 100 young adults aged between 16 and 22 years from villages in Gumla.

Gumla district has 71 % tribal households across its rural expanse, according to the Gumla District Census Handbook, 2011. Over 65% of the tribal population are cultivators while 20% are agricultural laborers. Farming carried out in villages such as those in Gumla, provides us with a reservoir of food. But as we choose what we eat, from the bounty of diverse food crops grown by farming families, what do they themselves eat?

While a study revealed that the villagers' diet consisted mostly of rice and leafy vegetables, the National Family Health Survey (2015-16) revealed that the percentage of rural women with anemia and lower body-mass index in Jharkhand was higher than the national average. To enrich villagers' diet, and make it more nutritious in a cost-effective manner, reviving traditional kitchen gardens appear to be the best option.

The tribal diet is frugal

Everyday diet of the tribal households of Raidih block of Gumla includes rice gruel, and a vegetable curry or chutney. Pulses or animal foods are consumed once a week, at the most. Even this minimal diet is not followed throughout the year: it is a common practice to reduce the number of meals in a day when there is scarcity of food or income. "Food is rice and leafy vegetables, usually marua saag, commonly found here after the monsoons. Good food would mean eating rice with lentils, potatoes, vegetables and curry. We cannot eat good food every day," 40-year-old Rita Devi from Patratoli village in Nawagarh panchayat told VillageSquare.in. Hailing from the Oraon tribal community, Rita has no land and works as a sharecropper half the year. The rest of the year she works as a daily wage laborer in Gumla town, which is 20 km away.

"We grow urad dal (black gram) every year, yet we consume it only occasionally. To eat it more often, a family would need 20 to 30 kg, but a household will keep only five kg, as the rest is sold," added Seema Devi, a self-help group member from Panantoli village in Silam panchayat.

Local diets have changed drastically

With the adoption of rice and wheat-based food, consumption of once-popular millets has drastically reduced. Only a handful of households grow millets now. Major crops cultivated in the district include cereals like paddy, maize and finger millet, pulses such as arhar and urad, and oilseeds such as groundnut, mustard and linseed.

While a wide variety of food is available in the markets, the food consumed by rural households is less nutritious. Use of locally abundant high-nutrient greens such as lebri saag, charota saag, bhatua saag and karonda saag has reduced. Villagers are more interested in growing and consuming hybrid varieties of vegetables such as radish, cauliflower, cabbage, carrots and spinach.

"When men in our village waste so much money on liquor, can't we spend 100 rupees to buy seeds to grow vegetables for ourselves?"

It is also found that miscellaneous foods, oils and fats account for more than half (52 %) the calorie intake of villagers. Vegetables, fruits, meat, eggs, milk, and pulses, account for a slim share of the calorie intake.

Kitchen gardens to the rescue

In Gumla, there is an existing trend of growing select food crops in homestead lands, and between rows of crops in farmlands, during monsoons. The families grow maize, vegetables, cowpea and dolichos beans for consumption at home, buying seeds at the market or preserving them from earlier harvests.

Those without homestead lands use available spaces near the house, or with mutual consent, homestead lands of others. Based on this practice, PRADAN (Professional Assistance for Development Action), an NGO, piloted an initiative named Poshan Vari in July 2016. Designed as a nutrition-based cultivation in homestead lands, Poshan Vari gardens were grown in 47 villages across nine panchayats.

The intervention covering over 600 households was intended to enrich the diet, and improve the nutrition status of the family. All the households did not have homestead lands, where available, the size varied between two and 10 sq., the most common being five sq. ft to seven sq. ft. Families of small and marginal farmers with farmlands measuring less than two hectares grew kitchen gardens.

Nutritional intervention

The number and nature of plants grown in kitchen gardens depend on many factors. These include availability and extent of homestead land, family size, manpower in the house and source of water if grown after monsoons, besides the family's knowledge and purchasing power of seeds.

A group discussion in Shahitola village centered around growing vegetables. "For how many days can we buy vegetables from the market? Where will we find money to buy them?" the women asked VillageSquare.in. The women's words echo one of the primary goals of kitchen gardens: enriching their diets by growing food for home consumption.

In a study done by Centre for Development Research, Pune, on the status of kitchen gardens, it was observed that in Gumla, with about 60 to 90 hours of labor invested across four months, the households could save Rs 1,600 to Rs 3,200. This is the money saved on expenditure for food from local markets because of the produce available in home gardens.

"When men in our village waste so much money on liquor, can't we spend 100 rupees to buy seeds to grow vegetables for ourselves?" said a Shahitola woman growing kidney beans and French beans in her kitchen garden. In addition to saving on income, kitchen gardens substantiated the existing diet. From their kitchen gardens, participant households availed seven types of vegetables, three types of legumes, three types of green leafy vegetables, and a fruit, cereal and tuber each for at least one agricultural cycle. Vegetables can be used in rotation and there is a wide availability of food for at least 3 to 4 months in one cycle.

In the first year of implementation of the Poshan Vari initiative in Gumla, villagers showed an enthusiastic interest in continuing the practice. Women are the key participants in growing kitchen gardens. Given that today nearly 70% of the total agricultural work in India is done by women, Poshan Vari is designed in a way that it does not add to the women's work burden. They spent less than two hours a day to nurture the gardens.

The way ahead

As an intervention, Poshan Vari provides a rich blend of seeds of local varieties of cereals, pulses, vegetables, and green leafy vegetables that are organically grown, to increase both the availability and diversity of food in rural households.

In the present design of the intervention, it is a challenge to include families with neither farmland nor homestead land and to use spaces near such households optimally, to grow food.

Such interventions are still relegated to development literature, despite the need to promote them to overcome the present agriculture-nutrition disconnect in India. It is time that such initiatives are replicated and agricultural processes are reconfigured so as to increase availability of food among rural households.

Existing users in Gumla acknowledge the value of kitchen gardens. Kitchen gardens can fix the skewed gender patterns in food consumption prevalent today in Gumla district and across India, besides improving the nutritional status of women.

Soumi Kundu is a research scholar with an M Phil in Development Practice from Ambedkar University, Delhi. This article was first published on VillageSquare.in, a public-interest communications platform focused on rural India.

The opinions expressed in this post are the personal views of the author. They do not necessarily reflect the views of HuffPost India. Any omissions or errors are the author's and HuffPost India does not assume any liability or responsibility for them.

Did the firecracker ban imposed by the Supreme Court of India on Delhi-NCR, ahead of Diwali this year, turn out to be a case of sound and fury signifying nothing?

The answer to this question depends as much on the empirical data as on public perception, especially of those living in the region and forced to breath the polluted air there through the year, and worse, during the most toxic autumnal and winter months.

Let's begin with the data.

According to reports, the Central Pollution Control Board reported that pollution levels in Delhi are lower compared to the air quality recorded during Diwali in 2016. The Air Quality Index (AQI) value on Thursday was 319, or in the very poor category category. Contrast this number with last year's AQI, which hit severe level after recording an index value of 431.

SAFAR, or System of Air Quality and Weather Forecasting And Research, found that the 24-hour average of PM2.5 and PM10, ultra-fine particulate matters that can enter the human bloodstream, were 154 and 256 micrograms per cubic metre, respectively, at around 11 pm. Both these numbers are at least 10-20 times the permissible limits for such pollutants in the air.

Of course, in certain parts of Delhi, the levels were much higher, with PM2.5 and PM10 crossing 800 and 1,000 micrograms per cubic metre around the same time in RK Puram.

Delhi's RK Puram at 978(Hazardous) on Air Quality Index #AQIpic.twitter.com/nYNGFcginM

— ANI (@ANI) October 20, 2017

HT reported that in Punjabi Bagh, PM10 reached 1,600 microgram per cubic metre at midnight, while in Mandir Marg it touched 1,046 microgram per cubic metre at 1 AM.

While the public anticipation of a cleaner Diwali that was set by the Supreme Court banning the sale of firecrackers on 9 October wasn't entirely thwarted, its efficacy depended on the communal efforts of a neighbourhood in different pockets of the city.

The firecracker ban, irrespective of its success, revealed one fundamental truth: nothing works better than collective will to change and group effort.

Pre-Diwali readings of the air pollution did raise the overall optimism, a feeling that extended well into the day of the festival of lights. But matters started getting out of hand from late evening into the night.

Social media users reported a gradual escalation of the burning of firecrackers as Diwali reached its peak, causing a layer of smog to descend on the city by the end of the night.

#delhipollution yes, it was a better #diwali this year despite having existing #pollution issue thanks #SupremeCourt@SCofInd in #delhi

— Amit Gupta (@amitgupta301279) October 20, 2017

Delhi people know ways to fool their government even after the cracker ban...no shame in killing the environment.. #Diwali#delhipollution

— Jason Serrao (@JasonKP) October 20, 2017

The Supreme Court-appointed Environment Pollution Prevention and Control Authority is empowered to enforce the Graded Response Action Plan (GRAP) to combat air pollution in Delhi and its surrounding areas.

GRAP has taken several laudable steps, such as banning diesel generator sets in Delhi-NCR until 15 March 2018 apart from stopping the sale of firecrackers before Diwali, their effect has been, at best, limited.

But that's hardly surprising. The extent of damage, wrought by poor public policy and its inability to control vehicular pollution in the city, can hardly be undone by a week's work.

Successive governments in the state of Delhi, including the current one under Arvind Kejriwal, have tried to stem the rot by various means. The odd-even rule for vehicular transport imposed a couple of years ago for instance only partially succeeded in reducing air pollution and caused inconvenience to commuters in the NCR.

Politicising the firecracker ban has not helped either.

While the embargo put businesses, especially the small and medium ones, under immense pressure, it is also true that the injunction applied only to the selling of firecrackers — not to buying and brining these items in from outside the jurisdiction of the state or to burning them.

As Sandip Roy pointed out in HuffPost India, the principle behind the firecracker ban related directly to the right to clean air, which is part of the right to life, mandated by the Constitution of India. It's deplorable if not outright nefarious to connect it to a narrative of Hindu victimhood, as the right-wing, including writer Chetan Bhagat, did on social media.

Tajinder Bagga, spokesperson of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) from Delhi, went a step further by distributing firecrackers among children, taking advantage of the wording in the Supreme Court's order, as it only prohibited the sale of the products, not dissemination.

Since the burning of crops by farmers in Haryana and Punjab lead to air pollution around this time of the year in Delhi-NCR, many are of the opinion that the firecracker ban is pointless unless the states are able to stop these farm fires.

In another article on HuffPost India, Shivam Vij said, "It is not reasonable to argue that if we are unable to stop farm fires, Diwali firecrackers must be allowed to pollute the air as well." As case studies show, farm fires alone do not causing the heavy cover of smog over Delhi. Those who deny or underplay the correlation between firecrackers and air pollution are merely perpetuated an insidious perspective.

Unfortunately, the cost of such petty politicking is apparent from the numbers. Here's a piece of (hopefully terror-inducing) news for those who are aggrieved by the firecracker ban or flouted it with impunity: India recently topped the list of countries with pollution-related deaths in 2015, according to a report by Lancet, the medical journal.

As many as 2.51 million people in the country have died prematurely that year due to diseases linked to air, water and other forms of pollution. India accounted for about 28% of an estimated 9 million pollution-linked deaths worldwide in 2015, as the study further found.

If these numbers fail to jolt the public into becoming more conscious of the damage they are causing to the environment, as also to the generations to come, no court order or state ban can hope to have any lasting impact on us either.

Also on HuffPost

Supreme Court's ban on the sale of firecrackers made Diwali a comparatively quiet affair in the Delhi NCR this year.

However, the order did little to help keep the pollution levels in control. According to NDTV, data from the Central Pollution Control Board reflected Delhi's Air Quality Index (AQI) value at 319, putting it in the "very poor" category. Some areas in the city recorded a steep hike in pollution levels with more than 24 times the average level.

As per the indicators of pollution monitoring systems, on Friday morning Delhi's RK Puram monitoring station recorded PM2.5 and PM10 at 878, which is quite hazardous.

But in comparison to last year, pollution levels this year seems much lower. In 2016, the day after Diwali, the Air Quality Index was recorded at 431, as compared to 319 this year.

In 2016, particulate matter (PM)10 and PM2.5 was recorded at over eight times the safe limit. This year, however, PM10 and PM2.5 levels were over two and half times the satisfactory limit.

Several news agencies and people from the city have been tweeting images of smog and pollution from Friday morning.

Here is a post showing India Gate a day after Diwali from 2016 and 2017.

Delhi: Visuals of #Smog from NH 24 near Pandav Nagar pic.twitter.com/N1beGXWzJU

— ANI (@ANI) October 20, 2017

Visuals of #Smog from Delhi's RK Puram pic.twitter.com/xifZDxIXwB

— ANI (@ANI) October 20, 2017

Its not Venusian surface its Delhi with runaway green house gas. Special 🙏 to parties who made this even worse. #delhipollutionpic.twitter.com/sC7unqxmnR

— Dhrithi Manohar (@DhrithiManohar) October 20, 2017

Next day of Diwali
Time 8:30AM
Location: Chirag delhi, CR Park pic.twitter.com/pDSNuQj0ZS

— kanishka proothi (@imkproothi) October 20, 2017

Flop or not? #Twitter debates #SC ban on sale of #firecrackers as #Delhi#pollution soars https://t.co/W8XIDvqEKn@htdelhi#Diwali2017pic.twitter.com/RFR0r3i02i

— Ajay Aggarwal (@AjayAggarwalHT) October 20, 2017

Also on HuffPost India:

At the coffee shop of JW Marriott, Mumbai, British filmmaker John Madden is hurriedly finishing a quick breakfast. The past week has been particularly exhausting — as jury president for the International Competition at the Mumbai Film Festival, Madden has been immersed in back-to-back screenings, mulling and deliberating over them with other jury members, including Alexis Zabe (he shot Pharrell Williams' Happy), Celina Jade, and Konkona Sen Sharma.

Madden, who attained global spotlight with the Oscar-winning drama, Shakespeare in Love (for which he was nominated in the Best Director category), went on to direct several films, some of which were produced by the Harvey Weinstein-led company, Miramax. Madden also directed the commercially successfully and critically-adored The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel and its sequel, The Second Best Exotic Marigold Hotel.

In a nearly hour-long interview, Madden spoke passionately about making films in India, Hollywood, and ensuring safety of women in the film industry.

Edited excerpts from the interview:

There's nearly unprecedented global outrage after stories of Harvey Weinstein's transgressions were exposed by The New York Times and The New Yorker. While this has led to a lot of conversation around the very serious issue of exploitation of women within the industry, a lot of talk has also been directed around how this isn't an aberration but it's probably the norm...

It's alarming to think that this could possibly be the norm. I feel a profound sense of dismay for not having known this. We just slept at the wheel. This was happening all through the time when I was associated with that company. What we should be paying attention to is what was happening to women and what probably still is. We should recognise that very seriously. I would lock horns with him whenever I did meet him but that was more about creative differences over films. He wields a lot of power and the instances that have come out are about his abuse of it. I assume it's happening elsewhere too. Luckily, this has opened some floodgates where a lot of people must be shifting uncomfortably on their seats. Power is routinely abused by people who are in the position to do so. We all experience it in different ways. This happened in a much greater degree in Harvey's case. It's shocking.

Have you heard any such instances within the British film community?

Honestly, I can't imagine it is. I am sorry. I am really not aware of that. My film career has been entirely associated with American finance so I am probably not the right person to know about it, but even then, I don't believe it is. Irrespective of that, I do think women are compartmentalised not only by film content but even in their access to the director's chair. Slightly less in the UK than in America, but it exists. Television, I feel, has tried to correct that balance to a certain extent.

As a filmmaker, what would you do to ensure a safe work culture for women on your film sets and even beyond?

Everybody has to look at things very differently now. I tend to have a lot of women on my crew. My films happen to be about women. They are often at the centre of the story that I tell. Gender diversity is the most important thing one can do and one has to keep that issue at the forefront just to correct the balance. I am not in a position of awarding jobs, except to my own crew so within that capacity I will of course try everything to ensure a sense of safety.

This is perhaps your fifth or the sixth trip to India. You've shot two major movies here — The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel and The Second Best Exotic Marigold Hotel. Is there an aspect of the country or the culture that you took home and which changed the way you view your own reality?

Oh, definitely. At the heart of both the Marigold movies is a very interesting idea: what happens to people when they get old? What happens when their options narrow down? Not everybody can afford to do what they did. What the film really is about is cultural collision and cultural stimulation. The great thing about India is how accepting and inclusive the culture really is — that was really my big takeaway. It's a culture shock at first. But you eventually blend in beautifully.

There is some synergy between the specific reality and the fictional content. In a way, the film mirrors the experience of the actors, who probably also discovered the idea of India for the first time...

Absolutely. So what you take back is this holistic experience which keeps you with this longing urge to come back. There are a few characters in the film that are too overwhelmed. One says, "Oh, I cannot cope with this, it's too much to take in." But eventually the warmth of the country makes everyone feel belonged. There's this wonderful energy that I was responding to. This sense of calmness.

The calmness, I feel, is a bit exoticised by foreigners, as the country is also full of contradictions. Along with the calm, there's maddening chaos too. What I found great about both films is the representation it offers to a demographic (elderly people) that's largely ignored not just by Hollywood but by industries across the world.

Yes, the demographic was sitting there but nobody was looking at it. It's an existing force which largely gets ignored, unlike say, millennials or the slightly older ones or whatever the current grouping is. But these are people who've lived their lives watching cinema and probably now have the time to actually go and watch a movie in a cinema as opposed to the youngsters who are consuming films on all sorts of online platforms. But the films aren't telling their stories. So we were quite surprised by all the heartfelt reactions. Not just old people, everybody loved it.

As a British filmmaker venturing into a different culture, more specifically Indian, the obvious challenge would be to avoid whitewashing stories set in that context. How do you navigate that thin line of being sincere without coming across as patronising?

That's a really, really big concern. The key to it is to respect the culture you are dealing with. You need to write it sensitively. In the Marigold series, it didn't really work against us as the whole film deals with the idea of outsiders coming into an unfamiliar culture. As a filmmaker I go into different cultures all the time — I have dabbled into cultures as varied as American and Greek. An outsider's view is always refreshing. The reverse is also true — Ritesh Batra, an Indian director, has made a British film (The Sense of an Ending) and now an American film (Our Souls at Night). The freshness of a story when told from an outsider's perspective is always unique.

The foreigner perspective is particularly relevant in your last film, Miss Sloane. In the film you take on the powerful gun-lobby in America and talk about gun violence, a problem that is uniquely American. For outsiders, like you or even me, the very issue — of Americans having easy access to weapons —​​​​​​​ and its seemingly intransigent status in itself is baffling, simply because of the alienness of it.

It absolutely is. It's as baffling to me as it is to you. How does a sensible, evolved, democratic nation even embrace this idea as something important? But once you look at it carefully, you understand its nuances and get a better perspective although that obviously doesn't change the side of political argument I stand for.

What perspective does it leave you with? If you take away the politics and the lobbying power of the NRA, is there any way you are able to rationalise it from a humanist point of view?

Well, you have to make an effort to understand how the situation is to a large number of law-abiding, decent citizens who otherwise display all the characteristics of human behaviour that you and I can recognise and identify with. And then there is this. You dig a bit deeper and you realise this notion (of possessing guns) is built into the framework of American individuality and comes from a deep mistrust of the government.

The Second Amendment was famously framed in way that allows American citizens to arm themselves. It has been wholly misappropriated and distorted by a big, special-interest business, which is the armaments industry. The narrative is entirely controlled to make sure that no infringement happens on those rights. The situation has become even more screwed-up thanks to the disruptive presence of Trump who wants to break the system apart and run it his own way. The horrors of gun-possession were particularly revealing in the most recent catastrophe in Vegas. It is inexplicable that this man had access to 47 semi-automatic weapons. What are you going to do with those other than cause havoc and carnage? There's no ideology, it's just someone flipping out.

What happens next is the whole nation goes into mourning but nothing ever changes because the NRA creates this atmosphere where any conversation about gun-control is equated with gun-confiscation.

Miss Sloane didn't quite do well. Do you believe it has to do with how contentious the issue is in America, in the sense that people aren't too comfortable addressing it? Or was it just that people needed time to recover from the trauma of Trump being elected as President?

We opened days after the election results. There was, yes, post-traumatic stress, depression, and a general sense of dismay. I was surprised that anyone even showed up. It's hard to overestimate the effect it had, kind of similar to the Brexit situation back in the UK. It had a seismic effect on people. It was an odd moment for the film to come out and didn't help us commercially. The film was immediately leapt upon by the Alt Right, assuming that we were out to get them, bleeding with our liberal point of view. Post Trump, everything has just become so much worse. Unfortunately, it's not restricted to the US but it's happening everywhere in the world. The growing nationalism is polarising everyone around the world. It's alarming and I feel technology hasn't helped. People are sitting in echo chambers where they see and read views that mirror theirs, ideas that reinforce their own beliefs. There's this intolerance towards an opposing point of view. I was very anxious about not demonising the other side but to just put forth a perspective.

The Second Amendment was famously framed in way that allows American citizens to arm themselves. It has been wholly misappropriated and distorted by a big, special-interest business, which is the armaments industry. The narrative is entirely controlled to make sure that no infringement happens on those rights

From Columbine to Sandy Hook, from Colorado to the shooting at Pulse nightclub in Orlando to now, the Vegas massacre, things have gotten progressively worse. Every shooting is the 'worst shooting in modern American history' until the next one, which is often worse than the previous. As an artiste who has engaged with the issue, do you believe films can act as a tool of social change?

To a certain degree, yes. I still do believe in that thought. For me, films are a way through which people connect with each other. When it comes to cinema, I have a humanist perspective. I make a Miss Sloane because it offers me the chance to examine one character of a country. There are other filmmakers who are more socialist in their approach. Ken Loach, for example, focuses on the marginalised folk of a community and I think that is incredibly valuable. As far as politics is concerned, I am a political filmmaker with a small 'p.' The issue of gun violence is a scandal. But the issue is also simple — it's the easy accessibility to weapons. And I think there isn't enough political will in America to change that. It's really shaming. At the same time, it's easy for me to point a finger because I am not even a part of that world.

Fair. But the sense that I get is that Hollywood isn't all that interested in addressing gun violence at all. The passion with which they produce movies and TV shows on, say, external Islamic terror, I don't think they do so when it comes to home-grown terror involving the abuse of guns.

Oh, there are very, very few movies on that. An American friend of mine told me that no American could make this film (Miss Sloane was largely financed by European production companies). I think the topic is too hot an issue for America. I am amazed that it hasn't been taken on. In any case, film is a very hard needle to thread when it comes to politics. Television, on the other hand, isn't. You have House of Cards, Veep etc but films on politics, like All The President's Men, are relatively lesser. Even with the star power of George Clooney, The Ides of March couldn't command an audience.

We live in times of great social and political uncertainty and I mean not just Trump and Brexit, but across countries, barring Canada perhaps. You've made romantic dramas and comedies in the past, but as time changes, does that also change the way you choose your subjects? Are you more tempted to focus on issues that have a stronger social resonance? After all, chronicling the times is an important function of cinema.

It certainly very much is. Most of my films are character-driven dramas because that's what I like the most. There is politics, yes, because I am interested in it. As a filmmaker, I am always looking for complex stories, ones which somewhere have a relation between the private and the public. While I do get your point that as a filmmaker one should definitely engage as much as one can, I don't think film is a political medium.

As the most accessible medium, films can dramatically sway public opinion.

They are but they aren't terribly successful at conveying messages. What films can do though is make people examine aspects of their own behaviour and look at situations differently.

I think that's an important function of cinema as well.

Also see on HuffPost:

NEW DELHI -- An estimated nine million people died worldwide in 2015 due to diseases caused by pollution -- the biggest cause globally of all premature deaths -- more than AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis combined and even more disastrous than all violence, with India and China contributing to 5.4 million of the pollution-related mortalities, a study has found.

"Pollution is the largest environmental cause of disease and premature death in the world today. Diseases caused by pollution were responsible for an estimated 9 million premature deaths in 2015," the study released on Thursday in The Lancet medical journal noted.

The study, the first to put together data on disease and death caused by all forms of pollution combined, said 16 per cent of all deaths worldwide were attributable to the environmental pollution.

This figure is three times more than the deaths from AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria combined and 15 times more than from all wars and other forms of violence. It is also one-and-a-half times higher than the number of people killed by smoking and over six times the number of people dying in road accidents.

In the most severely affected countries, pollution-related disease are responsible for more than one death in four, it said.

"In 2015, the greatest numbers of deaths due to pollution occurred in Southeast Asia (3·2 million) and the western Pacific (2·2 million). Southeast Asia includes India and the western Pacific region includes China," said the study.

Epidemiologist Philip Landrigan, dean of global health at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, and the lead author on the report said pollution has never received the desired attention of world leaders, civil society and health professionals.

"There's been a lot of study of pollution, but it has never received the resources or level of attention as, say, Aids or climate change," Landrigan said.

"Despite its substantial effects on human health, the economy, and the environment, pollution has been neglected, especially in low-income and middle-income countries, and the health effects of pollution are under-estimated in calculations of the global burden of disease."

The report said that pollution in low-income and middle-income countries caused by industrial emissions, vehicular exhaust, and toxic chemicals has particularly been overlooked in both the international development and the global health agendas.

"Although more than 70 per cent of the diseases caused by pollution are non-communicable diseases, interventions against pollution are barely mentioned in the Global Action Plan for the Prevention and Control of Non-Communicable Diseases."

Stating that several cities in India and China had recorded alarming annual concentrations of PM2·5 pollution, the study said over 50 per cent of global deaths due to ambient air pollution in 2015 occurred in India and China.

"Ambient air pollution in rapidly expanding mega-cities such as New Delhi and Beijing attracts the greatest public attention. However, WHO documents that the problem of ambient air pollution is widespread in low-income and middle-income countries and finds that 98 per cent of urban areas in developing countries with populations of more than 100,000 people fail to meet the WHO global air quality guideline for PM2·5 pollution of 10 µg/m3 of ambient air annually."

Other countries like Bangladesh, Pakistan, North Korea, South Sudan and Haiti have seen nearly one in every fifth premature deaths caused by pollution.

Pollution, the report said, was also "costly", costing some $4.6 trillion in annual losses - or about 6.2 per cent of the global economy.

"Pollution-related diseases cause productivity losses that reduce gross domestic product (GDP) in low-income to middle-income countries by up to 2 per cent each year. Pollution-related disease also results in health-care costs that are responsible for 1·7 per cent of annual health spending in high-income countries and for up to 7 per cent of health spending in middle-income countries that are heavily polluted and rapidly developing.

"Welfare losses due to pollution are estimated to amount to $4·6 trillion per year: 6·2 per cent of global economic output. The costs attributed to pollution-related disease will probably increase as additional associations between pollution and disease are identified," it said.

"At 11, he dropped out of school to devote all his time towards learning religious scriptures. He spent the next two years studying the ways of an ascetic life under his guru. In a month's time, he's going to renounce the world and start life afresh as a monk," says linguistics professional Mishti Shah* of her 13-year old cousin whose family is bustling around proudly preparing for his diksha ceremony next month. "You can't drive before 16, you can't marry before 18, you can't drink alcohol before 21, but you are allowed to give up worldly life at 13, or even earlier. This is ridiculous!" she says with barely concealed frustration.

The controversy surrounding this religious service cropped up again last month when a young Jain couple from Madhya Pradesh relinquished their assets and took diksha, leaving behind their 3-year-old daughter in the care of relatives. Both stories raise questions about the cultural and religious factors that infringe upon child rights, the helplessness of the state in ending it and the need for liberal social reforms.

In the past, attempts by child rights activists and human rights bodies to prohibit the practice of Bal Diksha (renunciation by children) have been met by severe resistance from Jain community leaders, and disputed legal judgements regarding the extent of state interference with religion. A bench of the Bombay High Court proclaimed Bal Diksha to be "as bad as Sati" in 2008 and pondered over the conflict between the Right to Childhood and the Right to Religion in 2011.

For decades, traditional notions of gender and morality have dominated the exercise of human rights, especially those of women and children.

Nicole Menezes, co-founder of Leher, a child rights organisation, says: "this practice is not in the best interests of children. They are not capable of making informed decisions for themselves. Moreover, there is a grey area concerning the legality of the issue. But I believe that the society really needs to collectively develop its own conscience and decide what it wants for children."

In recent times, members of the Jain community – legally recognised as minority – have been divided over the ramifications of this practice. "Bal Diksha has been a contentious subject within the community, with resistance to the practice developing in the early 20th century The Bal Diksha Pratibandh Andolan, a reformist movement led by a section of the Jains themselves sought prohibition of the practise, not so much out of concern for the ascetic child, but out of fear that children could not possibly uphold the rigours of an ascetic life.

For decades, traditional notions of gender and morality have dominated the exercise of human rights, especially those of women and children.

The controversy has continued into the present, but the terrain of arguments has seen a shift, with the more recent opposition centering on the rights of children," says Manisha Sethi, author of Escaping the World: Women Renouncers among Jains. For decades, traditional notions of gender and morality have dominated the exercise of human rights, especially those of women and children. When religious doctrines join hands with established cultural systems, it leaves barely any space for a broader interpretation of individual justice and freedom. And when left unchallenged, these often intolerant norms pave the way for the exploitation of rights in the name of rituals, conventions and spirituality.

Instead of treating a child's so-called disavowal of the worldly life as an occasion to rejoice, we, as conscious beings of a civilised society, ought to deplore the loss of his right to childhood, right to education, and more importantly, right to life.

The conflict between rights and religion is very real. When religion, society and culture start overshadowing the essence of human rights, it's time to step back and consider where one must draw the line. It is irrational to always leave it up to the law to govern the character of the society that evolves from time to time. This reformist confrontation is not about joining forces against religion; rather it entails standing up for the rights of children, transcending the prevalent social and cultural forces.

"The reluctance to challenge norms prevails among followers of almost every religion. Even when people sense a right from wrong, most are unwilling to publicly call attention to it because of the religious bearing attached to it," says Ektaa Jain, research scholar at the Centre for the Study of Social Systems at Jawaharlal Nehru University.

*name changed to protect privacy.

The opinions expressed in this post are the personal views of the author. They do not necessarily reflect the views of HuffPost India. Any omissions or errors are the author's and HuffPost India does not assume any liability or responsibility for them.

When you get a phone call from your husband who is based abroad, you expect a general conversation about his everyday life, when he'll be visiting next, your daily life and as the conversation peters out, the last question is always when will he call next. What you don't expect even in your wildest of dreams, is to have the conversation as 'Mrs. Salma Khan' and end the conversation as 'Miss Salma Ahmed'.

Nightmare or fiction? Neither, this is the truth of Triple Talaq (TT) in the lives of Indian Muslim women before the recent landmark judgement pronounced by the Supreme Court banned it by a 3:2 majority. The judges stated: "given the fact that Triple Talaq is instant and irrevocable, it is obvious that any attempt at reconciliation between the husband and wife by two arbiters from their families, which is essential to save the marital tie, cannot ever take place. This being the case, it is clear that this form of Talaq is manifestly arbitrary in the sense that the marital tie can be broken capriciously and whimsically by a Muslim man without any attempt at reconciliation so as to save it.

The rampant abuse of this form of talaq made the men all powerful, and soon there were triple talaqs being emailed, even sent on WhatsApp.

This form of Talaq must, therefore, be held to be violative of the 393 Fundamental Right contained under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. In our opinion, therefore, the 1937 Act, insofar as it seeks to recognise and enforce Triple Talaq, is within the meaning of the expression 'laws in force' in Article 13(1) and must be struck down as being void to the extent that it recognizes and enforces Triple Talaq." Justices Kurian Joseph, UU Lalit and RF Nariman delivered the majority Judgment. Chief Justice Khehar and Justice Abdul Nazeer dissented. In layman's terms triple talaq is not a legally valid type of divorce after this judgement.

Triple talaq is a form of divorce practiced by Muslim men where even the an utterance of 'talaq, talaq, talaq' was enough for them to divorce their wife. This form of divorce was only available to the Muslim men and not the women, who if they wanted a divorce from their spouse would have to approach the courts and seek a divorce.

Let's take Mrs. Salma Khan's case where she went to speak to her husband, who had called from the Middle-East, on a neighbour's phone, only to be stunned when he pronounced the triple talaq on the phone.

Let's take Mrs. Salma Khan's case where she went to speak to her husband, who had called from the Middle-East, on a neighbour's phone, only to be stunned when he pronounced the triple talaq on the phone. Similarly in my client Shaheen's case, which was even more bizarre, where her husband smsed her the triple talaq. When Shaheen first came to me I thought it was a joke but soon I realised that the joke was on her because the triple talaq was supported by the law. She essentially had no recourse, except to seek maintenance for herself and her children. But it's not always about the money, it's also about a sense of dignity and self-respect as a human being.

Triple talaq divests a woman of all sense of equality in a marriage. When a man is all-powerful and has the ability to end his marriage regardless of whether his wife wants to or not, is it not a violation of human rights? When there is a unilateral and unequivocal application of power we speak of it as an abuse of human rights, which is exactly what TT had become over a period of time. The rampant abuse of this form of talaq made the men all powerful and soon there were triple talaqs being emailed, even being sent on WhatsApp, reducing the woman to a helpless piece of chattel, because she had no absolute rights to contest this form of divorce.

The power balance which was skewed in favour of men will now tilt considerably towards women.

Triple talaq coupled with polygamy is akin to handing over a nuclear bomb to Kim Jong Un, which is what happened to Sajjida's marital life. Whilst she was in court fighting over the validity of the triple talaq, her husband married another woman. I can feel Sajjida's anger, hurt and humiliation each time we go to court to challenge the validity of the talaqnama and also fight for maintenance in court. When the thought of even sharing a boyfriend, with another woman doesn't cross my mind one can't even imagine, having to share a husband with another wife, especially when you have been so unceremoniously divorced using triple talaq.

However, with the passing of this path breaking judgement the socio-legal parameters of Muslim divorces will change in India. The power balance which was skewed in favour of men will tilt considerably towards women. The judgement also emphasises the implementation of Fundamental Rights, and it will be pave the path forward for the Uniform Civil Code. One thing is for sure, the lives of the new Salmas, Shaheens, Sajjidas will definitely not be turned upside down ever again, thanks to the death of the instant triple talaq.

The opinions expressed in this post are the personal views of the author. They do not necessarily reflect the views of HuffPost India. Any omissions or errors are the author's and HuffPost India does not assume any liability or responsibility for them.

New Delhi, Oct 20 (PTI) — The CBI has written to the government for reconsideration of its 2005 decision and allow the agency to file a Special Leave Petition (SLP) in the Supreme Court in the Bofors case challenging the quashing of an FIR in the alleged scam, officials said.

In a letter to the Department of Personnel and Training, the CBI conveyed that it wanted to file the SLP challenging the Delhi High Court order of 31 May 2005 quashing all charges against Europe-based Hinduja brothers in the Bofors case.

Government officials said the CBI was in favour of filing the SLP in 2005 but the then UPA government did not give its nod.

Legal experts feel that the agency will have to do a lot of explanation for condoning the lapsed time period of over 12 years.

The then Delhi High Court judge RS Sodhi had on 31 May 2005, quashed all charges against the Hinduja brothers — Srichand, Gopichand and Prakashchand — and the Bofors company and castigated the CBI for its handling of the case saying it had cost the exchequer about Rs 250 crore.

Before the 2005 verdict, another judge of the Delhi High Court, Justice JD Kapoor (since retired), on 4 February 2004, had exonerated the late prime minister, Rajiv Gandhi, in the case and directed framing of charge of forgery under Section 465 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) against the Bofors company.

On Wednesday, the CBI had said it would look into the "facts and circumstances" of the Bofors scam mentioned by private detective Michael Hershmam, who alleged that the then Rajiv Gandhi-led Congress government had sabotaged his investigation.

Hershman, who is the president of the US-based private detective firm Fairfax, claimed in television interviews recently that Rajiv Gandhi was "furious" when he had found a Swiss bank account "Mont Blanc".

Hershman, who was here last week to address a conference of private detectives, also alleged that the bribe money of the Bofors gun scandal had been parked in the Swiss account.

Also on HuffPost

The Rajasthan government has come out with an ordinance which purportedly tries to protect public servants, including judges and magistrates, from prosecution from actions taken in the discharge of their duties as public servants. The media has been widely reporting this as an attempt to protect corrupt activities, but this discourse is leading people away from the actual mischief sought to be done.

Public servants, including judges, are protected from prosecution for actions in discharge of their duties by Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) which lays down that a prior sanction to prosecute shall be taken from the competent authority of the Central or state government, as the case may be. Judges are provided additional protection under the Judges Protection Act from civil or criminal action for actions or words spoken during discharge of their duties.

When in comes to charges of corruption, even the Prevention of Corruption Act provides for a mechanism of prior sanction for prosecution of public servants under the Act.

This makes one wonder about the necessity of the ordinance promulgated by the Rajasthan government. This is where one notices the mischief.

The ordinance doesn't merely protect public servants and judges, it declares an embargo on the free press from reporting about the accusations or probe till the time prior sanction to prosecute is not granted.

The ordinance doesn't merely protect public servants and judges, it declares an embargo on the free press from reporting about the accusations or probe till the time prior sanction to prosecute is not granted. As it provides a time period of 180 days for a decision to be taken for such sanctions, there's effectively a six month gag on the media.

This strikes at the very root of journalistic freedom to report fairly and accurately, a freedom guaranteed by the Constitution as a fundamental right. Such a right to report fairly has been upheld by a catena of decisions of various constitutional courts.

The ordinance goes another step ahead and attempts to amend the Indian Penal Code (IPC) to make disclosure of identity of certain people against whom sanction is sought to be a cognizable but bailable offence punishable by imprisonment up to two years.

Such criminalisation of disclosure again hits at the very roots of journalistic freedoms and shall have a chilling effect on free speech.

This is still an ordinance, and as it attempts to amend Central laws it would require presidential assent. However, the threat to free speech is a clear and present danger.

Also on HuffPost