Wednesday 3 September 2014

Indian judiciary .A basic introduction

Indian judiciary .A basic introduction

Indian judiciary is one of the oldest legal systems , a continuation of the British legal system established by British at mid-19th century based on Common Law system. The constitution of India is the supreme legal document of the country.

In India, we have an independent and integrated judicial system. Unlike other federations, India has a single and unified judicial system for the entire country. There is Supreme Court at the apex level, High Courts at the State level and further below are subordinate courts.
                                                                                                                  
There are different levels and different norms for appointment to different levels of Judiciary . According to constitution of India, Chapter VI of Section VI deals with the Subordinate Judiciary.
Article 233 of the Constitution of India states that-
 Appointment of district judges
(1) Appointments of persons to be, and the posting and promotion of, district judges in any State shall be made by the Governor of the State in consultation with the High Court exercising jurisdiction in relation to such State.
(2) A person not already in the service of the Union or of the State shall only be eligible to be appointed a district judge if he has been for not less than seven years an advocate or a pleader and is recommended by the High Court for appointment.
In matters of recruitment of other persons to judicial service other than District Judges ,the power to make appointments is conferred on the Governor in accordance with State Public Service Commission and High court of that particular state According to Article 234 of the Constitution of India.
 In 1993, in what is popularly known as the “Advocates On Record” case, a nine-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court ruled that the statute had given the power and primacy of appointments of judges to the judiciary to insulate it from executive or legislative control and to ensure its absolute independence. The bench had given the ruling on a petition filed by the Advocates on Record Association, relating to disputes on transfer and appointments of judges.
Which till now was known as the collegium system in India.The process under which Judges were choose till now was In the high courts, the process is initiated by the respective chief justices. In the Supreme Court, the Chief Justice of India (CJI) takes the initiative. The final decision is taken by five Supreme Court judges, including the CJI.
A person should have practised at least 10 years as a lawyer to become a high court judge. The chief justice of the high court, with the help of two other senior-most judges, draws up a panel of prospective candidates. There is no system of public intimation or advertisements eliciting applications for the posts. After examining the credentials of the judges on factors such as competence and integrity and state intelligence inputs, the high court chief justice forwards the names of the prospective judges to the CJI for confirmation.
The CJI consults the collegium of four other senior-most judges of the apex court. The CJI and the collegium can approve or reject the names.
If the collegium approves the names, they are sent to the President of India through the Union government for appointments.
Supreme Court judges are appointed from among the chief justices of the various high courts or the senior-most presiding judges of the high courts.
The Supreme Court has the prerogative of appointing prominent lawyers with over 10 years’ experience as a judge of the apex court. Justice Santosh Hegde and Justice Kuldeep Singh (both have retired) were appointed to the Supreme Court directly from the bar where they were practising.
The Judicial Appointments Commission Bill, 2014 passed in the Lok Sabha on 13-8-2014 provides for setting up of a six-member National Judicial Commission to select and recommend judges to the High Courts and Supreme Court removing the collegium system in India.
The training of newly inducted judicial officers of subordinate courts generally happens in their respective state Judicial Academies for a period comprising of 9 to 12 months varies from state to state. They have institutional training, practical training and field training respectively.
India also has National judicial Academy situated in Bhopal established on August 17 ,1993. The National Judicial Education Strategy (NJES) was established by the Institute in September, 2006, as a national level system for judicial education, with which it hopes to achieve its objectives in technical education.  The institute offers 6 types of programmes to its three categories of candidates, High Court Justices, District Judiciaries and State Judicial Academics.
The vision of NJES is "Judicial education enhances the delivery of Timely Justice”.As stated in the National Judicial Training Strategy the national judicial education system includes (i) common aims, objects and methodologies as set out in the National Judicial Education Strategy; (ii) a System for Needs Assessment and Coordinated Calendar Development; (iii) System for Coordination and Cooperation amongst SJAs inter-se and NJA in Curriculum Development, Knowledge generation/knowledge Sharing and Knowledge Management; Sharing of Materials and Resource persons; and Library and Web Resources; (iv) Coordination of Delivery of Judicial Education and Impact/Quality evaluation; (v) Institutional Framework for Coordination Amongst State and National Judicial Academies; and (vi) A Framework for Discussing and Addressing Common Institutional and Financial Issues.
The Promotion of Judicial officers  in subordinate courts depends  upon A.C.R (Confidential Report) given by their respective District Judge to the High Courts. Merit cum seniority is also seen .Integrity is also seen as an important criteria for promotion of judicial officers .

Regarding elevation of High court Justice to Chief Justice of High Court or to Supreme court is totally taken by Supreme Court Collegium which is then approved by the Central Government. Any dissent note submitted by any Judge to the Centre regarding the elevation of a judge is returned by the Centre for further consideration.

Friday 18 April 2014


5 Terrifying Ways Police Can Legally Screw You Over



Although Hollywood likes to tell us otherwise, being a cop is far from Lethal Weapon-style no-holds-barred crime solving. Real police officers operate under a thick book full of rules and regulations intended to protect the rights of people like you.
It would be easy, then, to assume that you're safe from getting screwed over as long as you obey the law, or at least keep your crimes minor and private. You'd be wrong. In America, the courts have again and again given the police all sorts of leeway to royally screw up your life for almost no reason at all. It's just that most of you haven't been unlucky enough to find out that the police can legally ...



Strip searching is not in vogue these days. Ten states have made strip searching prisoners downright illegal, and even the federal government -- the people who are generally cool with stuff like Guantanamo -- looks down on it. This is because strip searches are a slippery slope at best: They are both humiliating and a potentially massive violation of human rights, to the point where they can cause diplomatic scandals. And they can be done to you at any time, for the tiniest misdemeanors that may or may not have happened at all. And there isn't a damned thing you can do about it.


Take the case of Albert Florence, the last guy you'd imagine getting shit from the cops: As a happily married family man with a spotless record, he was the definition of an average, non-threatening middle-class dude. This did little to save him from the long, overly grabby hand of justice when a cop pulled him and his wife (who was driving) over for speeding ... and promptly arrested Florence. Their computer said he had an unpaid fine from seven years ago, and thus he had an arrest warrant on his ass. So, off to jail he went, where they kept him locked away for a full week.
Florence's only entertainment in the strange pit of despair his life had suddenly become were the two full-on strip searches he had to go through, complete with the whole "lift your balls in front of observers and cough" experience. Keep in mind that this was just a dude with an unpaid ticket. He wasn't a violent offender or a likely connoisseur in the fine art of rectal smuggling. There was literally no reason to put him through a strip search or, for that matter, throw him in jail, because in reality Albert Florence had no unpaid fines whatsoever. He had totally paid that shit years ago, and he had a receipt to prove it. It was just an administrative error.




Jail time interspersed with liberal stripping and nut sack-swinging search action did not make a fan out of Florence, who took that shit to court the second he was released. However, as the Supreme Court was happy to point out, the judicial system is completely cool with fondling minor offenders, even ones that turn out not to be offenders at all.


Think about all the stuff you have on your cellphone: your text messages, a complete list of everyone you know, a complete log of every time you contacted them, photos of yourself and everyone you know ... hell, just glance at a person's phone and every last speck of their privacy is gone. You know everything. Law enforcement is well aware of this, and as such treats your phone with the utmost respect, by which we mean they're totally allowed to grab your phone mid-sexting and start browsing through your impressive collection of dick pics any time they feel like it.
Shaun Lowe/iStock/Getty Images


"Plus, what's that, a video of this very arrest? Whoops, deleted."

Like everything in today's America -- from quality television to ridiculous dentist bills -- it all started with a meth dealer. Abel Flores-Lopez was your everyday wannabe Heisenberg, pushing methamphetamine to the hardworking souls of Indiana. Only he wasn't too subtle about his work -- a police informant heard him gossiping on his phone about where he was going to sell his latest batch. The informant went straight to the cops, who swooped right in, arresting Flores-Lopez and a customer. For evidence, they took his phone and, with no search warrant whatsoever, rifled through its contents, checking the call history to make sure the time matched the informant's testimony, which it did.
Flores-Lopez appealed his arrest, arguing that the cops had no right to rummage through his private phone and thus had obtained the evidence illegally. After all, in the pre-cellphone era, the police would certainly need a warrant to search your phone records or look through your mail. Why would that change now that all of the same information happened to be stored in electronic form on one handy pocket device? The fact that this personal information is easier to access means it needs more legal protection, not less.
Deborah Cheramie/iStock/Getty Images


"But your honor, the government has already stolen all that information anyway!"

But Judge Richard Posner of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed -- he promptly shot down the appeal and ruled that "containers" found on someone can be searched during arrest, comparing a cellphone to a diary. In other news, the cops can apparently snatch your diary whenever they feel like it.
The Obama administration has since sided with the judge, specifically recommending that the Supreme Court rule in favor of warrantless cellphone searches in future proceedings. But hey, you don't have anything on your phone you don't want strangers to see, right?
Ultravisitor/Wikimedia


"Just a couple spam texts and my Snake score."

"Not me!" you say, "I keep that stuff on my laptop at home!" Well, guess what else the cops don't need a warrant to do ...

#3. Confiscate Your Laptop

Thinkstock/Stockbyte/Getty Images
If there's one piece of personal property that law enforcement absolutely cannot touch without a ton of paperwork, it's got to be your computer. Movies confirm that the bad guys' mainframe can only be accessed through cunning plans involving a full team of agents and one eccentric computer geek. Even if you're running a drug cartel or actively researching weird shit about the leaders of the free world, the government can't go searching through your personal files without a shitload of probable cause.
Unless you attempt to cross a border. In that case, your laptop is now theirs, if they want it.
james steidl/iStock/Getty Images


No normal rules apply at the border.

Pascal Abidor, a major in Islamic studies, was traveling between New York and Canada when the Border Patrol yanked him off the train, locked him up, and interrogated him about why he felt the need to be so Muslimy about everything. While this was going on, his laptop was taken and searched, and they found something so filthy and un-American that they needed 11 more days to comb through it. The compromising material that gave them this right was a bunch of Islamic pictures, something clearly only a terrorist would possess. Or, you know, a grad student majoring in Islamic studies.
Abidor was eventually released, and he showed his appreciation by immediately suing the government, because come on. He had some unexpected backup, too: The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and the National Press Photographers Association also filed suit, recognizing that both professions would be royally fucked if a policy of "let's confiscate every laptop with weird pictures when their owners cross borders" took hold. Mutual interests make for weird orgies sometimes.



Sadly, none of that swayed Judge Edward R. Korman of New York's Eastern District Federal Court, who squashed the suit. According to him, the federal government doesn't need a reason to search our computers at the border, and we shouldn't worry about it because those searches are, like, totally super rare anyway. And surely they'll stay rare, now that the courts have said that government agents can do it whenever they want, with impunity. That's how it works, right?

Sadly, none of that swayed Judge Edward R. Korman of New York's Eastern District Federal Court, who squashed the suit. According to him, the federal government doesn't need a reason to search our computers at the border, and we shouldn't worry about it because those searches are, like, totally super rare anyway. And surely they'll stay rare, now that the courts have said that government agents can do it whenever they want, with impunity. That's how it works, right?


Sadly, none of that swayed Judge Edward R. Korman of New York's Eastern District Federal Court, who squashed the suit. According to him, the federal government doesn't need a reason to search our computers at the border, and we shouldn't worry about it because those searches are, like, totally super rare anyway. And surely they'll stay rare, now that the courts have said that government agents can do it whenever they want, with impunity. That's how it works, right?


2.Search your boats
The greatest thing about boats is a distinct feeling of invincibility. You're free to sail the seas to wherever your vices are tolerated. You're Boat-Man, master of the universe! Hahaha! Aaaahahahahaha! Wait, hold on. Is that a Coast Guard ship rolling up on your starboard side and yelling something about a boarding? They'd better have one of those waterproof sea warrants, baby!
Galerie de Souzy


Or at least a kickass pirate bounty hunter license.

As free as you might be in international waters, good luck getting there if the officials feel they don't like your stupid face. It turns out that the Fourth Amendment does not apply in America's waters. As far as the law is concerned, authorities can freely swoop down, search your ship, and (possibly) keelhaul your drunken guests at any time they damn well feel like it, without any reason or obligation to explain why.
This little legal curiosity came to light back in 1980, when the Coast Guard stopped a sailboat called the Henry Morgan II because it had been shaken up by a passing ship's wake, and they wanted to make sure everyone was all right. There was no suspicion of any crime, no probable cause -- it was purely a safety check. However, they were greeted by an overwhelming smell of marijuana, and further investigation indeed revealed a couple of bales of the stuff. The people on board were arrested and charged with smuggling drugs.
moodboard/moodboard/Getty Images


"If only there was some way to mask scents on a boat with something equally smelly ..."

The culprits took it to court, going as far as the Supreme Court, and claimed that there was no reasonable suspicion for the Coast Guard to search the boat. The Supreme Court listened politely and laughed the smuggler out of the building to the tune of a 6-3 vote, citing a ruling that goes all the way back to the very first Congress as precedent. Yes, although we'll probably never know what America's founders thought about universal health care, they've made themselves pretty damn clear when it comes to privacy on boats: There's no such thing. Hey, if you didn't want the authorities watching you do it, you should have done it on land!
The only problem is, on land it's still pretty easy for police to ...

#1. Barge into Your House

John Moore/Getty Images News/Getty Images
Let's say you find the police at your door. Maybe the neighbors called them because of the strange sounds from your house, or maybe they just popped by to marvel at your glorious abs. Regardless of the reason, you feel safe. Countless TV shows have taught you that cops are like vampires in this particular regard: Unless you invite them in, they're powerless. Without a warrant, the doorstep is where they stop.
Rasmus Rasmussen/iStock/Getty Images


"How about just a peek? Come on, don't be a dick."

This makes it all the more surprising to you when the officers on your porch look at each other with a "Hey, did you hear that?" expression on their faces and walk right in without a second thought. "But where's your warrgblblblaargh," you inquire, your voice slightly muffled by the carpet that is suddenly in your mouth as they cuff you.
The officers who just mistook the sounds of your Looney Tunes/Cthulhu Rule 34 cartoon for a war zone were legally allowed to barge in because they invoked exigent circumstances, an emergency regulation that permits law enforcement officers to enter a building without a warrant. They're allowed to do it as long as they think evidence is about to be destroyed, someone's in danger, or a suspect is fleeing. And please note that the key phrase is "if they think" here: Although exigent circumstances are only meant to eliminate inconvenient "Hold on, I'll go get a warrant so I can come inside and stop that dude from stabbing you" situations, there's a lot of wiggle room for the arrest-minded officer.
Fuse/Fuse/Getty Images


For example, a police dog may detect that you're smuggling cats.

Just ask Hollis King, a Kentucky resident who ended up with a 10-year prison sentence for smoking pot in 2005. The police were chasing a coke dealer in King's neighborhood when they randomly passed his place and noticed the smell of weed wafting out. King had been enjoying a quiet 420 with a few friends, which prompted the officers -- who had missed their original culprit and were in full "We'll take any damned drug arrest we can get" mode -- to start banging on his door, yelling "Police!"
When the people inside made a ruckus (as drug-smoking people interrupted by cops banging at the door are wont to do), the officers immediately assumed evidence was being destroyed. They kicked the door right the fuck in, arresting Hollis and his friends for possession of marijuana and, ironically enough, cocaine.
Jovanmandic/iStock/Getty Images


There were also three murders and 15 robberies in town that night, but the Lexington police clearly had their hands full.

Unsurprisingly, King appealed, claiming that his Fourth Amendment rights were violated. Although the Kentucky Supreme Court did agree with him, the U.S. Supreme Court overwhelmingly disagreed, ruling 8-1 in favor of the Kentucky cops and calling the search entirely lawful. But really, isn't it worth it so that you can rest easy knowing that none of your neighbors are quietly smoking weed in their living rooms? This is just the price we have to pay.





Saturday 5 April 2014

Top 3 Ridiculously Common Science Myths

The Myth: Evolution causes something to go from “lower” to “higher”
While it is a fact that natural selection weeds out unhealthy genes from the gene pool, there are many cases where an imperfect organism has survived. Some examples of this are fungi, sharks, crayfish, and mosses – these have all remained essentially the same over a great period of time. These organisms are all sufficiently adapted to their environment to survive without improvement.
Other taxa have changed a lot, but not necessarily for the better. Some creatures have had their environments changed and their adaptations may not be as well suited to their new situation. Fitness is linked to their environment, not to progress. 
Humans Pop In Space
The Myth: When exposed to the vacuum of space, the human body pops
This myth is the result of science fiction movies which use it to add excitement or drama to the plot. In fact, a human can survive for 15 – 30 seconds in outer space as long as they breathe out before the exposure (this prevents the lungs from bursting and sending air into the bloodstream). After 15 or so seconds, the lack of oxygen causes unconsciousness which eventually leads to death by asphyxiation.

Wednesday 2 April 2014

The Terrible Sci-Fi Novels That Started A Worldwide Sex Cult


Around 25,000 people worldwide live a lifestyle based on the badly written series of fantasy novels known as The Gor Chronicles. In the books, women are treated as “lowly beasts for men to do with as they see fit,” and followers do the same. Women live as slaves, and go so far as to be branded like cattle. One English Master was arrested when his neighbors believed his slaves had been genuinely kidnapped. While many Goreans claim their lifestyle is safe and consensual, it’s been linked to cases of kidnapping and torture. As for the author, he claims to “know nothing” about the thousands of people that based their entire existence on his work.
John Norman’s Gor novels are set on a planet not dissimilar to Earth. The books tell of an insectoid race of super-intelligent beings that control the planet and have created a society of human beings they transplanted from Earth. There, they have formed a society that most people would consider highly distasteful.
While the books began as adventure stories, they soon became “extremely sexist, sadomasochistic pornography involving the ritual humiliation of women” as described by the Encyclopedia of Fantasy. In Gorean society, women are kept as slaves and are whipped, chained, and beaten accordingly. This is portrayed as an ideal society, and any feminist Earth women that end up on Gor soon realize that being a slave owned by men is the role they truly desire in life.
The women slaves are known as kajira, a moniker that has been adopted by the thousands of women that have submitted to be “lowly beasts for men to do with as they see fit,” as the books describe them. Kajira are branded in the books, and many women follow suit in real life.
This wince-inducing photo series shows a Gorean slave named Khaos Wolfcat having a stylized “K” burned into her leg (the letter can be seen in the photo above, part of Marcus J. Ranum’s “The Gor Project”). The process uses metal that’s been heated with a blowtorch being pressed into the skin, 18 times. It’s also possible see the slave collar around her neck, and the slave bells around her ankle that jingle as a constant, soothing reminder of her place.
While adherents claim their lifestyle is entirely consensual, they’ve attracted plenty of controversy. A man named John Hauff Jr. kidnapped a woman, and claimed he was a Gorean master. The woman was a sex worker, and Hauff had agreed to pay her $100 to let him use a sex toy on her. On the way to his house he told her all about the Gor books, and when they arrived Hauff put a collar on her before beginning torturing her with electrodes for several hours. When he was arrested, police found the Gor books in Hauff’s house, and the detective included a quote from the first Gor novel in his report: “The Perfect Bondage is said to be one man and one woman, the complete master, the complete slave, ideal and perfect for each other’s needs.”
In 2006, a Gorean slave master named Lee Thompson came to the attention of police in Teesside, England. Relatives of a 29-year-old Canadian woman advised that she was being held against her will. The father of an 18-year-old also contacted police, but they found the young man was there of his own will and they could do nothing. He gained notoriety and press attention after parading his slaves around town on a leash.
At the time, Thompson said “We don’t hurt anyone, we don’t damage anyone, everyone’s consensual.” The press coverage, however, caught the attention of one of Thompson’s former slaves, and in 2013 he confessed to forcing her to have sex with other men against her will in order to make money.
John Norman himself has little to do with the subculture he created. “I know nothing about ‘real-life Gorean slavery among some people in the BDSM community,’ ” he said in an interview, “BDSM is not Gorean. If something is not beautiful, it is not Gorean.” He adds, “women are wonderful, and precious. It is a delight to own one; why would one hurt her?”
Of course, a slave should be aware that she will be disciplined physically if she is “not pleasing.” To avoid this, “she need only be obedient, submissive, and found pleasing, wholly, and in all ways.” This ownership should be done out of love, and not be confused with cruelty, which is a different thing altogether.

Sunday 23 March 2014

ANARCHY




Anarchy has more than one definition.Most of the time Anarchy is intended to describe political  disorder or lawlessness within a society.As technology has developed so has governments of so called democratic republic or federal states have developed to such an extent that today they have started to control the lives of its people , yes the very people who gave them that power. Excuses given by them in the form of National Security , Protection of its people etc.

Recent leaks by Edward Snowden has shown us how our every move is being watched .This is not particular to U.S.A but all the countries .Putting a blame on U.S.A is wrong .As every country does that , the fact is they have not been caught red handed .




We should remember Freedom is free and our birthright, anybody who says it differently is trying to sell you something .We have evolved ourselves into civilized people .And we as so called civilized people are happy at what ever is being sold to us .The media is a full baggage of false propoganda ,our politicians sell us hope.If we look at history you will know that it was never for the people .The King changed into an President or Prime Minister .Policies have always been pro-rich and always will be .

We are drugged to believe in a false sense of security ,patriotism ,liberty and so called freedom .From our childhood we are programmed to go into the straight road and less toward deviant thinking .The soldiers who fight a war for their nation are forgotten people though  films are made and much accolade is given to the stars but what about the real ones.The purpose of what we do really is not what we want rather what some want us to do .We are conditioned to believe it.

Lastly,  we need an awakening not in the spiritual sense but to see the reality behind all the crap we take everyday.We should remember Governments should fear people ,  not vice-versa otherwise it is the end of democracy.

Friday 21 March 2014


Why online buying is changing the society  and the way we buy it ?


Gone ,are those days when we used to go to a mall or a retailer and haggle prices with them .E-commerce has changed the way we shop or buy things.You may call it the golden age of shopping . I am not exaggerating the fact believe me. India's e-commerce market was worth about $2.5 billion in 2009, it went up to $6.3 billion in 2011 and to $14 billion in 2012*(source-the Hindu).

Forrester Research’s projections for Asia-Pacific e-commerce sales by country (in billions, in U.S. dollars), in 2012 and 2016.

Now, enough of those mumbo jumbo data that i have presented now lets look at the positives and negatives of online buying.

POSITIVES
  • Infinite choice: Yes we have infinite choices we can compare prices , compare products and go to numerous sites .If we don't like one thing there are many others .Yes technology has given us Freedom of Choice.
  • Time :What took hours to search for and energy takes minutes now . Nowadays we don't have time so it makes sense to buy.We even get our groceries at a click of a mouse.
  • Psychological Pressure: There is no salesman nagging you to buy or influencing your choice everything is clearly depicted .So as a buyer there is no pressure if you don't like it you don't buy it .  
  • Cost factor: The travelling charges are zero for online shopping you just have to have internet and that's it .
  • Authenticity :Yes nowadays the products sold are authentic . The websites guarantee you that.

 NEGATIVES
  • It may make you a couch potato .You may become so lazy you don't even bother to go out since everything is just a click away.
  • You may go on to spend much more than you really intended to spend.
So, No matter whatever the economic climate is spending on online shopping is never going to stop rather increase annually, though independently owned shops ,retailers,malls  may be its first casualty though worth mentioning most big retailers have started to sell online nowadays.

Lastly , online shopping wont stop its physical counterpart.There are still areas where we prefer to go and buy.




Thursday 20 March 2014

Straight Talk: Why Indian Elections 2014 are not going to change ...

Straight Talk: Why Indian Elections 2014 are not going to change ...: Why Indian Elections 2014 are not going to change anything in India ? India is the largest Democracy in the world.The 2014 elections wi...

Why Indian Elections 2014 are not going to change anything in India ?

Why Indian Elections 2014 are not going to change anything in India ?


  • India is the largest Democracy in the world.The 2014 elections will be the biggest elections ever seen in the world bigger than U.S.A .Also the second most populous country in the world after China.In my points below i would explain to you about why Indian elections is just a show like any Broadway or movies you see .
  • Any government who stays for too long we as people in a democratic country gets bored with it .It is not about the Multi-million scams or the weak leadership ,as we humans for eg if we start eating the same food every day we will try to change our food as it will become bland for us .In simple words humans need change .
  • If you are an Indian ever heard of what development and progress  our politicians are talking about while giving speeches to paid audiences .Well they are attacking each other criticizing about each others shortcomings two of the biggest parties in India while one is romanticizing about the past  ,the other is riding on a leader who like fairy-tale is going to solve every problems of India. Though we don't know what happens in future call me pessimistic or skeptic most of the politicians are not bothered about solving them rather creating new ones or are too naive to even understand the real threats we are facing in terms of inflation ,economic deficit ,unemployment etc.
  • The money that will be spent on Elections have you ever wondered where does this huge amounts of money come from .I am not talking about some lakhs or crores but thousands of crores will be spent.Well all those scams you people have heard of where does all those money goes well this is where all is spent .Some financial estimates in newspapers says the budget expenditure of Indian elections will be bigger than U.S.A .Now you may say that India is a large populous country but we are talking here in rupees and not dollars .
  • Lastly , India is in need of reforms badly if this goes on for longer time we may turn out to be 2nd Zimbabwe of Asia though we all know the parties are going to take populist measures to appease the common man or in simple words giving pain killer to the mass after coming to pwer .So as citizens of India lets hope for the best .     


Wednesday 19 March 2014

its my motto


Straight Talk: 5 things why watching a Bollywood film is stupid a...

Straight Talk: 5 things why watching a Bollywood film is stupid a...: 5 things why watching a Bollywood film is stupid and waste of money ? First of all Remakes ,what has happened are there dearth of good ...

5 things why watching a Bollywood film is stupid and waste of money ?

5 things why watching a Bollywood film is stupid and waste of money ?


  1. First of all Remakes ,what has happened are there dearth of good scriptwriters in Bollwood that you have to make the old classics again to make money.money. OK i mean that  why is the need when there are so many good directors ,good actors total waste of all of them.
  2. Southern connection: The films are good but at this age shouldn't we make films which are more meaningful instead of copying blatantly from southern hits .Same formula again  and again Starring the biggest superstars .
  3. In Oscars we choose to send a feature film  and expect to win an Oscars .When is the crapfest going to end .The Standard of films which goes to Oscars are too high  even the foreign films not particularly from Hollywood .
  4. Recent films which are coming out of Bollywood wants to get in touch with the middle class reality instead it goes into chaos with many unanswered questions for the audiences who even try to watch it in a painstaking manner.
  5. Lastly, rural jokes ,crude characters and all the village buffons shown has become the trend of Bollywood .Please we go to multiplexes and try to connect with the ground reality but much have changed from the 70s and 80s .India has developed so has the rural scenario.