Land wars

If anyone has been reading the newspapers or going online to check for latest happenings in India, one cannot miss out reading about a certain ordinance issued by the Government of India which enables “land acquisition” for infrastructure projects which fall under several categories. Primary infrastructure – roads, rails, ports, dams, bridges and defense installations; secondary infrastructure like public schools, hospitals, cold storage chains, warehouses which can be built by private players by having the Government as a stakeholder and tertiary infrastructure – private schools, private hospitals, golf courses, townships etc. which are wholly owned by private corporates with no Government stake involved. In each of these cases, Government would now be a land broker acquiring the land from owners by paying the owners under a “R&R package” – which stands for remuneration and rehabilitation of those who will have to be resettled owing to the land acquisition. This ordinance has hit rough weather due to opposition from political parties in the Rajya Sabha (Indian Senate). Although, a defeat on this bill would mean loss of face for the Government internationally and weaken industry sentiments, in India defeating this bill or blocking it via pocket veto is of immense necessity for the benefit of farming community. I must confess upfront that I am not a stakeholder in this discussion because I am neither of the affected parties – land holders or land acquirer, I am involved however, for the larger goal of analysis of policy prescriptions and making necessary suggestions. Please make your own assessment after going through the salient features of the ordinance vis-à-vis the existing bill. I must state emphatically that I am neither a povertarian (a term coined by the political right in India) meaning someone who benefits from sustained poverty in India nor am I an out-and-out capitalist. In fact my political leanings do not matter on this subject. I would however ask to be simply judged on the arguments I place and also on basic human values.


1894 was the year when the Raj (British occupied India) legislated a “Land acquisition” bill used mainly to help the Government forcibly acquire land from owners by paying a set price known as the “circle price”, which is essentially the cost of purchasing agricultural land and then change the ‘use of land’ which means converting agricultural land to commercial land by the stroke of a pen and then use the land to build basic infrastructure like roads, rails, dams, schools etc. In those days, Government was the only entity investing in building infrastructure and this “act of acquisition” was dubbed as nation building. The 1894 act stayed on the Indian statute (like all other British laws, including sedition laws) after Independence and all the land acquisition for “nation building” was being done by enforcing a law that had “colonial mindset”. The first task to be performed by India’s Parliament in 1952 should have been repealing all the colonial laws and replace them with “democratic” laws. The government of the day did repeal many laws from the statute but let several laws stay on- like the land acquisition laws, the sedition law, the unnatural sex (section 377 in CrPC) to name a few. The idea was that these laws will soon become obsolete and future Governments would replace them with more democratic inclusive laws. Little did our first Prime Minister know that having a vision for India will pass with him and all future Governments will govern with aim to get reelected rather than to propagate their vision for India. Somewhere in the seventies and more so in the eighties (1970s and 80s) private players (Industrial houses) of India started getting involved in land purchase for expansion of business by using the Government machinery for land acquisition as it would mean easier access to cheap land without going through the hassles of purchasing land from the land market. Government on its part let the industry abuse the land acquisition law as they provided the much needed funds to political parties for election expenses. Consequently, until very recently Government of India and the various state governments acted like as a glorified land broker for industry.


One argument for the Government to get involved in land acquisition process is because of the land titles in India are not clear because of the hangovers of the “zamindari” (land lord) system and the existence of land mafia. Purchasing any land from the market is hazardous for the private parties as India does not have a database of land titles and relies on the rudimentary method of producing a sales deed as proof of land holding. The land mafia got involved and started producing fake sales deeds to harass the parties involved in a land deal and extort money. This lucrative business of the land mafia could only be stopped if Government took control of the land forcibly and then handed it over to the business for development purposes. This saved the industry from lengthy trial processes over fake claims or settling with the “claimants” of the land by paying them off. In each case the industry lost out because the delays caused and excess money spent. Ideally, the Government should have stepped in and cleaned up the process of land purchase, spend a few years and clean up land titles and create a state wise database of land titles and underwrite these titles. Instead, the Government chose the easier route of acting as a broker on behalf of private players by misusing the provisions of land acquisition law. The land owners (in most cases farmers) and small time agriculturist we paid pittance and their land was forcibly acquired in the name of development and in many cases these farmers lost their livelihood and had to relocate to other villages and work as landless laborers or go to cities and live in slums and work as day laborers. Over a period of time this caused a lot of stress on the cities whose infrastructures were not equipped to bear influx of people in such large numbers. So instead of solving one problem fully, the Government helped create many new problems.


Amount of land that was acquired by government would often be more than the project needed and hence over a period of time, Governments effectively created land banks which it held on to instead of returning it to its owners. After the change of “land use” from agriculture to commercial, the land price soared from 10 times the original up to 100 times the original price depending on the project it was being chosen for. Elected politicians pawned of the excess land held by the Government to favorable parties who in-turn benefitted from change of land use (legitimately or illegitimately) and became millionaires overnight. All this continued unabated and unchecked for a good 25 years when thousands of farmers lost their land and became landless laborers while a handful of people made millions out of this deal. Effectively, the government which was mandated to protect the interests of the governed (farmers included) was reduced to a broker who was abusing its powers to help a few chosen ones make quick bucks at the cost of others. In the year 2010, farmers from all over India laid a siege on New Delhi. The immediate irritant was the events in Bhatta-Parsaul, villages in Uttar Pradesh where the state had to deploy police to evict farmers who refused to give up land to the Government and instead squatted on the lands and dared the state to evict them forcibly. What ensued shook the conscience of the nation. The Police brutally assaulted the villagers, shot rounds killing many of them and injuring scores of them. In a few cases, the women of the village were sexually assaulted. The people who were killed were piled up in a heap and their carcass burned. A land acquisition exercise had turned into a mass murder by the state of its subjects. This prompted several farmer associations to lay siege on New Delhi and force the hand of the Government to repeal the land acquisition law and legislate a new modern law which is fair to the farmers as well as the buyers.


After two and half years of consultation with NGOs, farmers associations, land owners, industry and other affected parties, the Government of the day came up with LARR (land acquisition, rehabilitation and resettlement) act of 2013. The legislation was discussed threadbare in both houses of the Parliament and several amendments moved and accommodated. Finally in October 2013, India had, a sort of modern, sort of fair and sort of compromise deal on land acquisition legislation which was meant to undo the wrongs of the past and make sure that future land acquisitions were done in a fair manner. I will highlight the salient features of the LARR 2013 which were well meaning and also the shortcomings of the law.


Consent: this was a major win for the farmers and other land owners. The land was being acquired forcibly thus far in the name of development and national interest. Going forward, land owners consent would be mandatory (up to 80% for public-private partnerships and up to 70% for infrastructure projects). Meaning, at the very least 2/3rd of the land owners will have to consent for a land to be acquired for projects. Of course there were emergency clauses put in where consent would be waived – mainly for defense installation and nuclear reactors etc. but this clause was largely seen as a win for the land owners.


Remuneration: apart from forcible acquisition, the biggest issue that the land owners had with 1894 act was the lack of proper remuneration. The Government changed the land use post acquisition and helped industry make millions while the original land owners were paid market rate (pre land use change) which were peanuts considering the profits the users of the land made. This gulf brought about a sense of disgust where small time land owners lost the land, lost their livelihood for meagre remuneration while the land users made millions by merely changing land use. LARR 2013 was expected to provide post land use change remuneration but did not go as far; it fell short but was not as bad and unfair as the 1894 act. LARR 2013 provides for 2 times the market rate for urban land and 4 times the market rate for rural land which was sort of a mid-way between both extremes. Another clause added was to make original land owners a shareholder in the new enterprise that was to come up on their land so that they have some share of the profits generated by the enterprise built over land (exceptions include defense installations, nuclear plants, dams etc.) The percentage of shareholding pattern would be agreed upon in between land owners and buyers.


Rehabilitation: apart from the remuneration to the land owners and giving them a share in the windfall profits that change of land use would bring, the daily laborers who work on the piece of land which is being sold also lose their source of livelihood and hence were made a stakeholder under the new law. The bill encourages the enterprise set up on the land to provide a job to one member of each family who is being displaced by the land acquisition. Also, the people have to be relocated to so a similar location which could provide access to purchase land at comparable rates. It is not the ideal like to like displacement but the legislation encourages the Government to relocate the displaced masses to appropriate areas with comparable standard of living.


Multi crop land and forest land: the legislation prohibits acquisition of multi crop land and forest land for purpose of infrastructure building (except as a last resort). In case of the forest land, there is an exception where tribal people will have a say on the land acquisition and will also get a stake or a job in the enterprise that is being put up on forest land. These safeguard were put in because the 1894 bill did not recognize tribal rights and hence caused a constant rift between Government and the tribal who saw this exercise as a trespass on their land.


Social impact assessment: the social impact assessment clause was added to win the confidence of locals. Over the period of 65 years of independence, Governments had lost the confidence of land owners by acting in the interest of industry and by not representing the land owners / farmers adequately. The Governments would acquire land many times more than required and hold it as land banks. This caused a loss to the land owners and gave windfall profits to government cronies. Proper social impact assessment will ensure the locals are explained the benefits of project and also ensure that no extra land is acquired by the Government.


Retrospective clause and land return: The retrospective clause was added to ensure that if land has been acquired many years ago and has been lying unutilized and is part of Government land bank it will be returned to the original land owners and re-acquired under the new law if the need for the land exists. Likewise prospectively if any new land acquired that remains unused for a period of 5 years will lapse and should be returned to the original land owners.


The legislation had an important lacuna; it exempted 13 types of projects which require majority land acquisition from the ambit of the LARR as there were other laws guiding these projects. Parliament decided to revisit this legislation in a year to add a clause removing these exemptions after the other 13 laws were repealed via legislation.


A subsequent ordinance by the Government overturned most of these safeguards sans the remuneration clause in favor of ease of business but in the bargain it turned the clock back 125 years. The underlying assumption for the ordinance is land owners and farmers don’t bother about nation’s progress and hence their land needs to be taken forcibly by Governments in the name of progress. Debate is on in the Parliament and outside over this largesse to industry. We will soon know the future of land wars in India.


So long...

Defend the freedom to offend

Today, more than ever, the debate is raging – should the freedom of speech be absolute or should there be as we in India say “reasonable restrictions” and I have always been trying to figure out why the debate rages given that it’s a no brainer. To me the right to speech is like the right to live – absolute. There cannot be reasonable restrictions on my right to speak up, no more than my right to draw breath. I understand that my stance would trouble the minds of people in charge of maintaining law and order as they have the added responsibility to temper the right to feel offended with the right to free speech, but I have the liberty to make my case. So, I come back to my original point, should the right to free speech include the right to offend?


Over the last few years I have been troubled by acts of violence against freedom of expression. I was too young when Salman Rushdie was hounded for his novel “Satanic Verses” but I do remember my countrymen targeting M.F. Hussain’s paintings and issuing death threats to him and forcing him to relocate to Qatar (where he stayed until he passed away in 2011). I also remember the banning of Rohinton Mistry’s “Such a long journey” by Mumbai University upon insistence from Aditya Thackeray (who has a family history of intolerance and hatred) and Shiv Sena burning the copies of James W Laine’s “Shivaji –Hindu king in Islamic India”. In each of these cases, I used to ask – why do people write things that offend others? Don’t these writers and painters have the common sense that if people get offended they will get these books / art banned and the whole purpose of writing/ drawing them is not served. I also openly supported the Government stance to ban, as I viewed it to be the only way to enforce the rule of law and maintain peace. In each of these cases, I must admit I had not viewed the paintings or read the books to make an informed judgment but sort of trusted the judgment of my Government.


The only exception came when Government of Tamil Nadu banned the release of Kamal Hasan’s movie “Vishwaroopam” following protests from ‘Muslim leaders’ who thought it represented Muslims in poor light. The reason I differed with the Government’s stand was because I had watched the movie in Hindi and did not see any portion which was offensive, in fact it was a very well made movie. Kamal Hasan lost a lot of money on the movie and vowed to never work in another movie in a land that does not respect freedom of speech. It was later known that the then Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu had a personal beef with Kamal Hasan and she had misused her office to ban a movie that had no overt offensive portions. The Government of Tamil Nadu also arranged for “protests” so that the ban seemed genuine and the rest we know is history. This event got me thinking of the previous bans and wondering if in each of these cases the protests had been “arranged” for? In fact in each of these cases the alacrity with which the Government acted in banning free speech was hinting that the whole thing could have been stage managed. Almost like, sections of the Government machinery asked a few people to protest so that the ban can be enforced citing law and order issues. The judiciary of India has a lot to answer for in each of these cases as it allowed the executive to run amok and repeatedly insult the sacred trust that binds the Government and the governed.


After my experience with the Indian law of applying “reasonable” restrictions on freedom of speech, I looked up on the internet for examples around the world where the ruling Governments have erred on the side of freedom rather than the side of caution. Guess what, there is not a single example in the world where freedom of speech with “reasonable” restriction has not been abused by the incumbent Government against the governed to further their own agenda and ideology. I could not find a single example where the Government has told these blackmailers who hold the law and order to ransom to back off and has defended the individual liberty of speech. Almost always, the Government whose primary objective is getting re-elected has sided with the freedom to get offended exercised by the majority to unreasonably curb the freedom of the individual – in many cases an author or artist. So the threat issued by Islamic leaders worldwide and the fatwa issued by the Ayatollah resulted in the banning of “Satanic Verses” in almost all countries except the United States. The surprising part was nobody had read the book and yet nobody thought it was necessary to question these fatwas which was based on heresy. A celebrated author was hounded, forced to apologize and his publishers and translators were stabbed or assassinated all based the fatwa which was issued without reading the book. The Government of Rajasthan revoked the permission for him to travel to Jaipur literary fest of 2013 because the Muslim leaders of India were still raw about Satanic Verses written almost 25 years ago. This is one example of how so many countries – many of them governed by modern and forward looking leaders did not stand up to threats but tamely allowed the freedom of speech to be curbed. In India you will find several examples where the Government has stood in solidarity with the lumpen elements or looked the other way when they attacked freedom of speech and expression at regular intervals. India went a step further and formalized this via the Central board of film certification or CBFC whose job is to issue certificates to motion pictures screened in India but they use their office to ban films or section of films playing the moral police for the Government in power.


After I have made an elaborate case of how the Government cannot and must not be a custodian for protecting my freedom of speech because the Government is often dictated by the will of the majority even then the “will” is directed by spurious intentions. So who could be a valid custodian? The Judiciary? In countries where the Governments will side with the majority and bring unjustified injunction on the voice of the individual stating she was “creating ill will among communities” the fight becomes skewed against the individual who is now taking on the might of the Government and its battery of lawyers. So does this mean freedom of speech should and must be absolute? Well yes, an unequivocal yes. The reason being the harm an individual can do by misusing her freedom of speech can be minimal as compared to the harms the majoritarian view can do to individuals. An individual misusing her freedom of speech and expression could at most draw cartoons insulting the holy prophet (PBUH) but never physically harm anyone, however, the people exercising their right to feel offended just gunned down 16 individuals and caused severe mental trauma to several survivors and family members. There is a strong case for all countries to come up with air tight constitutional amendments in favor of absolute freedom of speech and not ask individuals to apply “restrain” when they express their views.


On the larger debate, I would also exhort all individuals to wield the weapon of “freedom of speech” responsibly and use it for the larger benefit of society rather than meaningless gratification. We all are aware of the far reaching impacts of our expressions and how speeches from great leaders have changed the futures of countries. So I would rather use my freedom to express to stand up for the right of the underprivileged or the unrepresented or something that is obviously wrong with the society rather than to settle personal scores by calling people names. I am appalled by scores of people creating hate websites, writing take down pieces in magazines, drawing insulting cartoons and making videos with sole purpose to hurt religious sentiments and or making incendiary / racist remarks. While I would hope people do not resort to these tactics, I would request with folded hands that these fringe elements must be ignored as that would be the best way to put an end to the menace of individuals seeking their 15 minutes of fame. Let there be no more bans on books / plays / movies or cartoons rather we have societies use freedom of speech to educate masses to be tolerant rather than extremist in their views, and where necessary learn to ignore the obvious attempt to provoke a reaction. The 6 letter N- word is not outlawed by any state / federal law in America but societies have helped successfully phase it out of common parlance. Imagine the power of speech / expression if this can be achieved without resorting to threats and violence.


So long…

Theory of life

I must confess I have not known much about the life of Stephen Hawking despite the fact he is one of the most celebrated scientists (or cosmologist) of our times. I am not a theoretical physics major so I would apologize if I may seem trivial at times and at times would seem like focusing on everything but physics as I write this post. Recently, I had the privilege of watching the movie “Theory of everything” – based on the life of Stephen Hawking and it got me thinking on the aspects of life touched in various measures during the narrative. It is amazing how a movie based solely on the life of an atheist could get you thinking about God, but it did. At times I had tears in my eyes as I could see the work of a power much superior than I working along with Prof. Hawking even as he continued to not recognize its existence. You could call it his destiny, I could call it God and we would both be right in equal measure. I would like to highlight some obvious and some subtle messages I received from the film apart from the mind boggling achievements of Prof Hawking.


Life is struggle and it ends at death: Most of us feel it, some of us might not feel it so obviously, but life is synonymous with struggle. Every day in different way we face new problems which we overcome and experience success. Some of these problems get the better of us but in a way teach us lessons and prepare us for the problems arriving in future. So long as we live, we will encounter problems and hence it serves us right to learn ways to face them rather than turn our backs to them. The harder the problem, the sweeter is the victory over it and by that measure Prof. Hawking life is a grand testimony to fighting and winning!


Behind a successful man is a beautiful and loving woman: This adage has been beaten to death often times referring to how the wife picks up the slack at home and takes care of the kids while the man is outside chasing his dreams. This is special, but in case of Prof Hawking, his wife Jane quite literally is the captain steering the ship of his dreams. Every single time it seemed like he was giving up on life and accepting his fate given his medical condition, she was there cheering him up and pushing him to fight harder and win grander. When Prof Hawking meets an accident and is on life support and the doctors have all but given up and are encouraging her to sign the DNR, she firmly stands with him citing “his work is incomplete”. One wonders if Prof Hawking would achieve all that he did despite his medical condition without the love and support of his lovely wife Jane. Maybe it was her love that kept a man alive for 40 years; to whom doctors gave just 2 years to live.


Any medical condition is surmountable: Every person alive has some or the other medical condition. Some of us may have severe allergies; others have sinus problems and relentless colds. In case of Prof Hawking it was ALS – a motor neuron disease which degenerates the muscles slowly – severely limiting all voluntary activities. The message is best put across when Dr. Hawking says “No matter how bad the situation is there is always something you could do and be good at. So long there is life, there is hope”. If we learn to take things in our stride and continue to live life and pursue our dreams, even insurmountable problems seem petty.


Everyone deserves happiness: The character of Jane the lovely wife of Dr. Hawking brings out different shades of her personality and makes a larger point to a society that often spends time evaluating the mistakes made by others instead of understanding that each of us live under different circumstances so there cannot be a common measure of good / bad in this world. The movie depicts Jane as a strong woman who at no point gives up on her husband despite his advanced stage ALS. There are several instances when Dr. Hawking seems to have given up and Jane stands by him and nudges him to continue on his path of research. There is also an instance when she is overwhelmed by the amount of work which involves taking care of 3 children and a husband and seeks an outlet by joining the church choir and getting romantically involved with a widower she meets there. I found this person intriguing who had her priorities sorted and never gave up on her husband for the sake of her lover. In fact, when the time came to choose between the two, she picked her husband. It tells us that people all around us are dealing with their problems in their own unique way and should we as a society be unable to help, we should not get in the way of their happiness by drawing boundaries of good/bad and judge them.


In closing, a big salute to Dr. Hawking for leading a wonderful life and achieving all that he has achieved and to Jane for standing by him all the time.


So long..

Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc

This is a funny story from India. Please do not mistake this for figment of imagination because this is scarily true and happening in real time as we speak. The Prime Minister of India is currently travelling- either in India or abroad, addressing people and trying to earn good will for his newly formed government. The problem is, he cannot help but oversell his achievements. He is constantly in campaign mode never once stopping to actually govern. Over the last 180 days, he has travelled abroad for 40 days (roughly) and spent almost 25 days campaigning for the state elections in India. So roughly 50% of the time has been spent in pure bluster with no productive work (unless you get all philosophical and say he is representing the country every day).


Now, comes the kicker. Since he has had no time to settle down and think through policies, there have not been many initiatives from the Government except a few photo ops and renaming old schemes and attempting to target them better. Obviously, we would understand and would treat him with deference if he would have said as much. Problem is, he goes around tom-tom ing about achieving more in 6 months than what previous Governments have done in 5 years and one is obligated to ask respectfully, Mr. Prime minister, what exactly has your Government achieved. The response would make you both laungh and cry. Apart from rising and setting of the sun, every other thing is being counted as “achievements” under the new regime. Schemes that have been running for decades now are being packaged as new ideas. Government response to help citizen during natural calamities is termed as achievement and votes are being sought on it. I feel disgusted by the narrow mindedness of the person who is supposed to be my leader and represent my country is so busy representing just himself.


I sure hope in the days to come people will notice more and more what I have noticed and perhaps motivate the PM to switch from campaign mode to govern mode. Until such a time arrives, India is nothing but a stage and the Government is nothing but a comic providing unlimited laughter to us citizens.


So long..

Crash and burn....

So, one of my colleagues got married this week and the first thing I told her was “so yet another crashes and burns eh?” with my usual cunning smile and what is very famously known as “irritating smirk” amongst people who know me. People around me froze and there were a few uncomfortable silent moments before the colleague smiled and waved me off. Man! she got the joke but so many of them standing there did not. “Just because you are single, you seem to have an opinion about marriage. It is not that bad” whispered one of the girls standing next to me. I just smiled blankly at the unasked / unwelcome advice and moved back to my desk thinking to myself, “Man!!… I need to shut up more often”. Then, on the way back home I thought to myself… “Did that make sense? Why do we single men often make sarcastic comments about marriage and why do married people think it’s a case of sour grapes?” Frankly, I am yet to find any friend who has advised me to get married because it is good for you. It is usually the other way around “Marriage is not that bad”, they often say.


How do I tell a chef, who asks for feedback, that the food is awful. “Hey, it was not bad...” Now, do you see my apprehension believing my married friends and colleagues? Marriage seems a lot like sex or God, each one experiences it differently and nobody can put that experience across in coherent words. We often hear the “Ummmm” / “well …..” / “You see……” / *awkward silence* preceding the description of the experience being married. Men are more dismissing of the notion and depending on how close you are to the man, you can either get to hear “Marriage is a f**king headache” or “too large a price for sex”. Women are more subtle by nature and hence you probably will not get blunt statements from them, but, when a woman bites her lips and says “It’s not that bad” you know she means exactly what the men say bluntly. So here is my follow up, if it is so much work, why do people marry?


Nobody knows, but everyone will argue using a few standard points. Some of the arguments about marriage are as follows and please don’t call me a cynic, if I poke holes into them.

1. Marriage is about togetherness – my take is if togetherness is so natural, why do couples look so ill at ease with each other. Why do men whisper to their friend around their wives and why do women send their husbands away when they plan a girls’ night. Me thinks, the togetherness is for the cameras because I know of room-mates who are more in sync than a man and his wife.

2. Marriage is a compromise – I don’t know about you, but to me compromise is a loss of face. It is the fig leaf one uses when one cannot accept defeat. If marriage is always about winning, why do couples always describe it as a “compromise” is beyond me.

3. We all need someone with us – I accept the premise of human beings as social animals and hence we all need someone in our life. What is beyond me is that someone needs to be a person from opposite sex and the reason you are together should be marriage.

4. You need to have a family – this is the most confusing reason to be married, having kids. So it is not about you having fun, it is more about giving up fun to start taking responsibility of a wife/ husband and children and never be the same fun person you were before. I mean who can spare the time eh?


So now, you get my point why people describe marriages as “not that bad”?


Now, I am all for marriage if it’s the thing for you and you feel at ease in the setting but why frown at the people who do not fit into it and wish to live their lives a different way. I have always seen married people advice singles to get married, never the vice versa. Maybe it’s just envy that cannot let the married people see the singles live on happily. I do understand that sex is an important need of life and marriage is a healthy way to enjoy sex and if need be, to start a family. But, I see so many messed up people around me that I feel procreation should be a privilege extended to a few whose lineage might benefit the world and the rest of us should only be allowed to have sex without resulting in children. In mythology, we know of stories where women chose to procreate with Gods and not their husbands, maybe, just maybe there lies your hint that just because you can, you need not have kids.


I feel obligated to declare that I am not single by choice or a confirmed bachelor. I have seen some messed up things in relationships which have made me wonder if I am made for it. I was about to be married but I am not. All I am saying is this; I don’t know if I am glad I was saved or sorry that I missed. So before you go “Just because he is single…..” I feel I should tell you that I have had the buffet and barfed. Again, I am not for or against marriage; I am just making the case that it’s not as important as it is made out to be.


So long….

It's just not entrepreneurship

Wikipedia defines entrepreneurship as “the process of starting a business or other organization. The entrepreneur develops a business model, acquires the human and other required resources, and is fully responsible for its success or failure. Entrepreneurship operates within an entrepreneurship ecosystem” and Cronyism as “partiality to long-standing friends, especially by appointing them to positions of authority, regardless of their qualifications. Hence, cronyism is contrary in practice and principle to meritocracy”. I am sure the definition in the Oxford dictionary is not very different from this. What the definition conceals or does not amplify enough is that the entrepreneur not only starts with the controlling equity but also starts with the responsibility of paid up capital and any further liquidity that is needed to maintain the company’s operating cycle. In India, the lines between entrepreneurship and cronyism fades into irrelevance and if you pick out 500 cases of startups who made big in India, 498 would have been successful only because of cronyism.


I might be accused of broad stroking but I would insist that sadly enough I am not exaggerating. Don’t get me wrong, I am not for a moment saying that Indians are not enterprising; I am just saying that Indians are so adept in “jugaad” or in English “doing what it takes” that we forever look for loopholes within the law and abuse it – which would be fine until you understand that loop hole was left in there by our lawmakers at the behest of these so called entrepreneurs. I can vouch that if an international auditing firm did an audit today, most of the billionaires of India would be proved as cronies who made money by abusing proximity with people in power rather than based on genius of innovation. I often wonder if only Indian entrepreneurs would channel their energy, which they spend on generating loop holes, into investing in research and innovation, India would have already produced the next coolest startup company with a $2bn IPO. The sad part of the story is that Indian entrepreneurship is so bereft of ethics that we generate the ideas, the capital, the land, the operating capital based on cronyism. It’s a shame that the Government is not a majority stakeholder in equity of these companies because they sure do all the hard work to keep these billionaires and their companies up and working. It is said the promoter owes a fiduciary responsibility to the shareholders, in India; the Government executes this fiduciary responsibility.


Are we doing well then? Well, it would seem like we are, actually we are not. Generating value for the company by risk free profits is a risky proposition for even a quarter, yet, year after year most companies in India are generating “value” for its shareholders by risk free profits. Consequently, the change of CEO / or board of directors has a lukewarm response at the stock market and trading pattern but should a benefactor Government or minister go out of power and all hell breaks loose the share prices takes a major hit and shareholders lose value of their savings. Now, you would ask, the promoter or the majority stakeholder should also lose value and will be hit maximum, should she/ he/ they not worry about of this pattern of trading? And here lies the kicker. NO! The shareholding pattern would tell you that the entire paid up capital for the firm was from a debt issued to the promoter(s) by a bank who has accepted the proximity to the Government as valid collateral while issuing the debt. This is scary, what this means is the only stake of the promoter in the company is her/his/their ability to abuse their proximity with power centers in lieu of which they hold majority stake in the company. You will also find that the “asset of cronyism” is so heavily levered that the company spends most of its revenue in servicing its debts raised for the paid up capital. And yet, surprisingly, the company share is trading at premium without any growth prospects and proper revenue forecasting.


This is because the unseen stakeholder aka the Government is busy paddling below the surface generating value for the shareholders by executing the fiduciary responsibility on behalf of the promoter. I will not get into the topic of how such crony enterprises are a bad deal for small investors who purchase equity. That is a separate issue that needs specific attention. I will only highlight how these crony enterprises are bad for the economy. So coming back to the point of Government executing fiduciary responsibility, consequently, these companies get special use to natural resources and out of turn benefits from various arms of the Government, including revenue services who allow too many illegal tax deductions to help pad the net profit. The resources acquired by these companies are then gold plated and the end products are sold back to Government at a premium price. So, the Government not only provides raw materials, it also provides as a market to finished goods at price premium. The tax dollars of citizen are spent in helping few promoters make money without any sort of investment or plan and this relationship works perfectly till the Government is in power. Once a new Government comes in, these companies lose share value as the new Government launches a witch hunt against these cronies and stops all benefits extended to them (effectively hampering their revenue cycle) while launching their own set of new cronies who suddenly become the budding prospects of our “enterprising India”. Then, there are few cronies who are in good books of all political dispensations and will benefit no matter who is in power. One has to wonder if this kind of capitalism actually helps a nation or destroys a nation. I leave it to your judgment.


Should a promoter fall out of favor with the Government and start to lose share value due to impacts to revenue generation, they reach a point where their operations are hit due to liquidity crunch and since these companies are typically highly levered, they will not be able to generate operating capital. It would seem that promoters will care enough to raise money by investing their private money (given the fact they are majority stakeholders), but more often than not, promoters let the company bleed. There are job losses within the company and investment by people in the stock goes kaput. The original debts (paid up capital) are held to ransom by the promoters and either the banks are forced to restructure the debts or issue fresh debt to restart the operating cycle. Since the company was not based on sound plan to begin with, this new operating capital cannot sustain the company for very long and then begins the long process of litigations / bankruptcy / job losses etc. Meanwhile the promoters are living a comfortable life as the law protects their private assets from being liquated to sustain the company. So this is how, these cronies end up wreaking a havoc on the economy while being exposed to minimum risk should a company undergoes bankruptcy.


The Governor of Reserve bank, Dr Raghuram Rajan, in an address very recently raised many of the points covered in this post. He touched upon the way shareholding is structured and the absolute impunity with which most promoters operate risking the economy at large. Dr. Rajan remarked “India is a country with many sick companies but very few sick promoters”. It would seem the cronyism in India is like riding a tiger (borrowing phrase from Ramlinga Raju of Saytam fame), you cannot get off without being mauled or killed. One should hope for better things to come along but any major change is possible only after a great bust killing an entire generation of crony companies almost bring the economy of India to a grinding halt. Does anyone else have a plan?


So long….

Psychology in times of crime

From time to time, professionals are expected to take time off and regroup / retain and reinvent the strategy to engage their customer in a better / friendlier way. It is part of growth for a professional in a sales job or a customer care job or several such professions where there is daily interaction with humans. One evening, my girlfriend who is a doctor at the reputed local hospital was asked to attend a seminar for a week on how to be friendly towards her patients. I could sense she was cribbing about the waste of time this seminar was going to be. A week later, she had this new found appreciation for what psychologists do and how helpful they are to professionals caught in the grind of daily routine. Turns out the week long seminar helped my girl cope with her job in a better way and with a positive outlook. It also helped me as she would be in a good mood on her return and our regular arguments had become rare.



If you think about it, having a human interaction as part of your job can be both invigorating as well as frustrating. Invigorating becasue you get an active feedback of a job well done and it motivates you to do better and work harder plus there is a satisfaction of making a difference to society. Frustrating because human beings do not always think logically and often act emotionally and when it comes to their health they are a victim of their habits. Doctors often find it frustrating that the solution of problem is right there and yet the patients choose to do the opposite. This will be true of other professions too, let us assume a tech support guy is trying to help an middle aged man fix his computer and the guy is being unnecessarily hassled by the owner of the computer asking him unnecessary questions and often implying the tech support is is a waste of time even though he needs their help. People working in tech support / customer care are often an unappreciated lot and hence always need to be trained to not allow such interactions to escalate into war of words because customers can be mean often times.


The police department takes the cherry and the cake when it comes to underappreciated jobs. Plenty times they do a good and stop impending crimes but they cannot brag about it as it is “their job”, but should anything go wrong, the police department bears the brunt of it and rightly so. In essence it’s the thankless job of a sentry. Nobody remembers 1000 good judgment calls but everyone remembers the one bad call. Police department also has an additional burden of being kicked around by the politicians for not being there at their beck and call. There is nobody who has it worse than a police officer. One can only imagine the daily stress these men in uniform go through. The army clearly has its target defined as enemy but often, police have to act against one citizen to protect the rights of another citizen and there are obvious mistakes made and personal equations and prejudices that come in play. I am not justifying the incident at Ferguson or many such incidents that happen far too often, I am merely trying to suggest solutions.


I am sure police are trained fairly well at using arms and dealing with hostile situations. However, am not sure enough is being done to have regular sanitization trainings for the police to deal with women / minorities (religious / racial) and to actively fight the unconscious bias in their minds. The problem is that police officers are so exposed to crime and criminals that they forget that a large portion of their job is dealing with citizen and helping the regular Joe feel safe and secure. It’s always in the last category that the police are found wanting. They are loud / brash and often ill-mannered while interacting with citizen and an extreme manifestation of this are the tragic incidents where young boys / girls are killed in police encounters simply because the police officer in question was not adept at handling citizen and only trained to handle criminals. This mindset needs to change and police department should be open to seek help rather than defend an indefensible behavior on their part. When Officer Wilson says on TV “I did my job and I would do it exactly the same way should it happen again...” I feel sorry for him and sorry for the citizens who have to interface with officers like him who have for so long been so insensitive that they have lost touch with the large portion of their job which requires empathy.


Lastly, my heart goes out to Michael Brown and other such stupid kids who faced a bullet where a severe reprimand was due. Rest in peace! May their family and friends have the strength to bear the loss. Amen!


So long…

India's own Ferguson

It was a typical night of Aug 9 2014 at Ferguson (St Louis, Missouri) when an 18 year old teenager Michael Brown was shot dead by Officer Wilson. Ever since, Ferguson has not been the same. Initial few days witnessed incessant protests from the locals who found the police action unacceptable. Well, Officer Wilson and others from the police department were hard pressed for a justification for the killing. It could have been a bad neighborhood; it could have also been that Michael fit nicely into the description of “usual suspect” but shooting to kill an unarmed teenage student cannot be justified by any stretch of imagination. The least the police department could do is suspend the officer concerned for long duration for colossal lack of judgment or discharge him from the police duty and let him face the prosecution for his act. Instead, the police strong armed the demonstrations and for almost 3 weeks Ferguson burned and faced the brunt of irate locals going berserk. “It could have been me” said one of them when asked why he was protesting; Point taken. Do any of us still feel this was over reaction? (A grand jury subsequently decided that Officer Wilson is innocent and is let off)


President Obama addressed the nation on Monday morning (24th Nov 2014) and appealed to the people of Ferguson to maintain calm and respect the rule of law. I have nothing to add to the President’s soothing words except, Mr. President! Justice seems to evade Ferguson! Rule of law is fine but the law has a letter and a spirit; while the judgment of the jury is perfectly adhering to the letter of law, it seems to be lacking in the spirit. It is not enough if justice is done; it should seem to have done too. Nobody is asking the officer face death sentence, but am sure the people will say “A mistake was done and a life is lost. Surely someone must take responsibility”. It is here I agree with the residents of Ferguson when they protest the decision of Grand jury. Please understand, I do not condone the violence but when the state fails to react to citizen’s concerns protests get out of hand.


India does not have a good record on the likes of Michael Brown’s either. However, India goes one step ahead when such incidents occur. Police immediately brands them terrorists and politicians brand them Pakistanis. Consequently, nobody dares to question the state’s overreach in the fear to be labeled “traitor” for siding with the enemy or worse, being next in line for similar action by police. Don’t get me wrong, it may sound like I am suggesting that police are generally the bad guy, am not. However, too many officers get involved with politicians and execute “extra judicial killings” at their behest in the name of fighting crime. Anyone who questions them in Parliament is shouted down as anti-national and nobody takes to the streets fearing police backlash. The police derive their power not by rule of law but by political patronage and this is where it gets all messed up. India has a long list of Michael Browns and will continue to have until its citizen realize one thing – “It could be me next time”. We often complain people don’t stand up for the right cause but we forget we never stand up for other’s rights too. If we had stood up and fought against the police overreach the first time, irrespective of the fact the person they shot and killed was a gangster or terrorist or whatever, things would not have been so grim. Today, police can literally “pick-up” inconvenient individuals and eliminate them by staging an encounter because they are sure nobody will protest nor will the courts take cognizance.


With the death of Michael Brown (may rest in peace) a town arose and stood by him and fought for him despite not being related to him. Even though we do not need the incidents like Michael Brown in India, we desperately need the spirit of “I am my brother’s keeper”. Until then, India will continue to see cases like Michael Brown.


So long…..

Vanishing age lines

Declaration: I am attempting to write about a subject I have not studied in depth nor have any inclination to research and hence to a mind trained in theoretical physics this attempt might seem focusing on the trivial and missing the point. I am merely using information readily available on the internet and basic knowledge of human metabolism to base my premise. I am open to criticism and willing to debate any point of view contrary to mine.


It was 4 am on 24th November 2014 and I was still awake reading through articles of Wikipedia as well as other sources on the 5 dimensional world. Interstellar – the movie had intrigued me and bowled me over. I wanted to read up on certain aspects of it and the actual science on which certain facts of the movie were based. Now, I do understand that movie script writers use cinematic liberty to build a premise of their choice and I am not planning to step on their toes; however, despite loving the film and the stellar performances by the lead actors a few aspects somehow didn’t hit me right. I am merely attempting to put things in perspective so that anyone who had queries similar to mine could find a few answers here and possibly appreciate the movie better.


For starters, I did not know of a worm hole or the 5 dimensional world – as depicted in the movie. Let me try and elaborate on these terms so that the story can be appreciated better. Worm hole is basically used for time travel (along the same lines as on earth). Assume 2 people are travelling from point A to Point B on earth. One is travelling by foot while other travels by an airplane. The person travelling by airplane is actually using accelerated velocity mouth of a worm hole to get to the other point quicker than the normal travel and by expending lesser energy. Even though the example is rudimentary, it makes a limited point of time travel. Worm holes never take you back in time because we are still operating in 4 dimensional spaces where time moves only in forward direction. The distance in space is measured in light years (distance travelling by light in one year @ 300,000 km /sec) and worm hole simply saves us a few light years of travel exactly like an airplane travel as compared to travel by foot. In the movie, Interstellar, the actors go into the accelerated mouth of a worm hole to travel to a galaxy far far away in a few hours.


The second bit that intrigued me was the 5 dimensional world. Unlike anything we know in the four dimensional world, a 5 dimensional world allows you to go back in time. Basically, it is not an actual world but a theoretical concept (or spiritual) that makes it possible to travel back and forth in time rendering the time like a physical dimension. Theoretically, this means that people living in 5 dimensional world can go back in time and face the same events again and use their retrospective knowledge (or hind sight) to deal with it better because they have already dealt with it before. Like let us suppose we could go back in time and avoid the world wars by not allowing the triggers to escalate because now we know that it would result in devastation. 5 dimensional world has a spiritual side as well. If you meditate on your problems had enough, your mind activates energy centers within your brain which helps you identify any unresolved issues of your past hidden in your subconscious mind and resolve them therein alleviating your problems. In essence you have literally travelled back in time to change events of your life. It is also said that a fully active mind can even recall events of past life and help resolve any unresolved issues. In practicality however, we continue to live in a four dimensional world where we cannot go back in time. The point to remember is 5 dimensional world do not reverse the physical state of body, it merely allows you to travel in your present form to revisit events of the past. In the movie Interstellar, Coop uses 5 dimensional world to travel back in time to send a message to his daughter, Murphy on the solution to the problem she was facing to execute what the film terms as “Plan A”. You will observe that Coop does not become younger; he has merely travelled back in time to send a message.


The final bit of the movie and the only bit I could not agree with was the climax where Coop meets his daughter Murphy who is on death bed aged 90 odd years while Coop himself is still young and dashing even at his 124 years age. This is a false notion that is shown perpetually in most sci-fi movies attempting to depict time-space relativity. The time – space relativity governs the relative time elapse on earth vis-a-vis any other place in space. Due to variance of effect of Sun’s gravity and relative speed on rotation of planet, each planet has differing cycles of day (sunlight) and night (dark) ; likewise due to varying distance from sun there is difference in time taken to revolve around the sun (number of days in a year). These effects of time-space relativity can be used to depict that we will have longer days and night and each year may have many more days (when compared to earth) but this does not mean the elapse of time is slower. Imagine having 2 watches, one faulty that moves the second hand every 10 seconds while the other normal. For every 10 hours on the normal watch, the faulty watch would show only one hour, but the time elapsed would be same in both cases. Meaning a day on Jupiter maybe 5 hours as compared to 12 hours on Earth but that does not mean 5 hours is equal to 12 hours, it just means Jupiter rotates many more times than earth in any given time duration. Likewise, because Jupiter takes 12 years (earth time) to complete one revolution around the sun, it does not mean that an astronaut who has landed on Jupiter ages by one year after every 12 years. This is a fallacy because the time elapse is the same and time elapse is not measured by solar clock or seasons (refer atomic clock). The movie Interstellar, on more than one occasion shows Coop telling his daughter Murphy that they would be of same age when he return from his space trip and in the climax a 124 year old Coop has not aged physically while his daughter is old and frail seems more fantasy than reality. Time elapse and human metabolism are linked and human beings age due to metabolism and time elapse and not due to time-space relativity. I assume the writer has used this false notion liberally in the movie to help average viewer appreciate time-space relativity by means of human aging.

Please go watch the movie Interstellar. Amazing screenplay, good performance and the relative slow pace helps viewers grasp the concepts of theoretical physics and adapting to the science jargon. Highly recommended.


So long…

Its gonna be OK

Indian parents have a larger than life presence in their children’s lives. Especially the Father; not only is he the daddy, he is also the person the family counts on at all times, especially the tougher times. Abhilasha’s dad was no exception. He was a tough nut to crack. The only two times anyone had seen him smile were on the day Abhilasha was born and yesterday when she got engaged. It was a grand ceremony attended by the near and dear ones along with the two families. Abhilasha could not help but see her dad smiling from ear to ear while attending to the guests. She was secretly feeling happy that she has in some way contributed to that elusive smile. Abhilasha remembered her dad for always making her smile as a child by saying four simple words – “Its gonna be OK”. These words had a charm in them. It made seem to Abhilasha that her father was always there to hold her in case she stumbles??. It built that protective net around her for all times.


Abhilasha is many persons in one. She is the qualified financial analyst at a leading bank; she is the loving daughter to a doting mother and the pride of her father. She is also the fiancée of Shekhar and a bowl of instant laughter for her many, many friends. Abhilasha excelled in all her roles, especially the ones with her friends. It could have been her soft heartedness but Abhilasha was always there for her friends in both good and bad times, irrespective of whether they would ever stand up for her. Abhilasha could never hold grudges and had an infectious smile; this endeared her to everyone. Her philosophy was never based on “what is in it for me”, it was “I will receive help from some place the day I need it”. In fact meeting Shekhar was also a co-incidence, which she had accepted whole-heartedly. Shekhar loved her and that is what mattered, not how they met and got to know each other.

The wedding was in a month and Abhilasha was busy with her last minute shopping for the special day. The invites were to be sent out next week and mom had asked her to finalize the guest list, she also had a bachelorette party to attend which her friends had planned for her. “Too many things to be done before the wedding. Sigh”. There were times when she wondered if she had done the right thing and chosen the right man. What if he was not the one for her? Then she shrugged off those thoughts thinking if he were not the one, he would not have lasted thus far. She smiled to herself and congratulated herself on her maturity and got back to her to-do list. It was mid night and suddenly, Abhilasha started getting chills. This was peak summer and it seemed odd to have sudden fever. Abhilasha’s mother asked to relax and take it easy as she was obviously stressed out. As she lay down with her head on her mother’s lap, she told her mom that she has been getting these chills on and off for a while. She had also complained of chest pains but it was brushed aside as stress acting out. Abhilasha told her mom to take her to the doctor as she didn’t want to take a chance of falling sick so close to the wedding.

At her gynecologist’s appointment the next day, she informed the doctor of her symptoms and was advised to do a few blood tests to check for viral fever or infection. “It’s probably just the stress, but why take a chance,” said the doctor. The next morning, her mother drove her back to the doctor who asked her to take further physical tests. She felt like a specimen who was being turfed to every possible department for every possible test. A couple of times, she asked her mother who was silently nodding but not responding. But it was a welcome break from the hectic wedding schedule and Abhilasha even chose to relax although the doctors were not allowing her to enjoy it. By evening, she was seated in front of the doctor’s chamber with her parents inside chatting with the doctor. Abhilasha was busy on her phone texting her friends about her off day. Suddenly, the doors open and her parents walk out. Abhilasha walked to her dad, for the first time he didn’t say “Its gonna be OK” ; he merely glanced away not meeting her eye. Mother was silently weeping and the doctor asked her to come inside. Abhilasha blanked out for the next 30 minutes while she was inside the doctor’s chambers.

Breast cancer. The two words were left hanging to her as she blankly left the doctors chamber. Abhilasha had many questions to ask, some to God, some to her parents and a few to the doctor but something had muted her. It took her a couple of days to get out of that daze. At times, she thought this was a nightmare, which will end soon. Other times she wondered what would happen to her now that she has cancer. Would she die? Why would she die so young? She had so many plans. What about her wedding? Of all the questions, the one that stuck the most was why didn’t her dad say “It’s gonna be OK”? Every time she was alone with her father, she would look into his eyes hoping somewhere there would be that reassuring look which acted as her safety net throughout her life. Abhilasha’s dad is her super hero and when everything failed she always counted on him to rescue her. Today, as he was avoiding eye contact, she slowly started realizing that her father could not rescue her this time. She felt abandoned for the first time in her life. The cancer did not get to her, but the helplessness did.

She spent the next couple of days thinking of talking to Shekhar and discussing the treatment options. The cancer was treatable but she would lose some flesh in her left breast and would probably need light chemotherapy. It reassured her that things were not as serious as she assumed and probably in a years’ time she would forget it ever happened and get on with her life. Shekhar was supportive and told her he was with her always and she would not worry about anything and take the problem head on. So long as her family and Shekhar were with her, Abhilasha could muster the strength to face all the problems. In the week before her operation, the doctor explained to the family as well as her prospective in-laws about the nature of treatment and explained to them about the disease. In India, we have a lot of misconceptions about cancer and treat it as a killer disease; however the killer was not the disease but the avoidance by the women to get examined. The treatment was simple but many women do not to get treated early due to social and personal inhibitions and the fear of losing their breasts. Somehow, it makes them seem less womanly and the age old subconscious fear of family and spouse not accepting her as a normal woman causes them to delay treatment and which in turn ends up killing them.

Abhilasha got to know what she was facing, although she would not be losing her entire breast, she would need counseling to accept the change to her body. She spent the rest of the week in counseling and was mentally ready to face the operation on the day it happened. The procedure went of successfully and one could barely know the difference in her except for the scar on her left breast. After the chemotherapy when she returned home, her father was at the door to receive her with a big hug. After a long time, Abhilasha saw the same old “It’s gonna be OK” look in his eyes and she felt she had successfully defeated cancer. Abhilasha was well and fine. During this time Shekhar was a big source of support to her and stood by her all the time. She had not expected him to understand her problems but he played the role of a life partner excellently. The next six months went by and Abhilasha grew from strengths to strength almost back to her normal, almost forgetting the ordeal she had been through not so long ago.

In India, the disease may spare you but the society never does. As the families got together to decide on an alternate day for the wedding, several relatives of Shekhar’s raised an issue about her health and if she would be capable of mothering a child in her life. Others wondered aloud if her parents had known all the while that she had cancer and had hoped the disease would be identified only after the marriage is solemnized. Neither of Shekhar’s parents made any effort to kill these stray comments and the entire proceeding went on like a well-rehearsed orchestra where it was decided that the families should wait for another 6 months for the yearly follow up and take a call on the wedding dates based on the doctors report. Abhilasha talked to Shekhar about the events and he convinced her that it was best they wait so that nobody could make an issue of this. “If I ever marry, it’s only going to be you Abhi. Nobody can convince me to do otherwise” he said. She was so proud of him and her decision to choose him as a life partner.

The six months breezed past and luckily for Abhilasha the yearly follow up went well and the doctor told her she was cured completely and was only expected to do routine blood tests once a year for 5 years (mandatory for all cancer survivors). It was a happy event and they celebrated it with a family dinner at a local restaurant. Curiously, Shekhar gave the dinner a miss. He had been busy at work off late. Shekhar had a marketing job and the quarterly targets pushed him to extend the work hours. Although he could not spend same amount of time with Abhilasha, he made up for it with text message and calls. Today, neither he was present at the doctor’s appointment nor was he at the dinner. Abhilasha was uneasy, he never did this before. In fact when she texted him before he said aloud that his prayers had been answered and this was the happiest day of his life. Abhilasha confided in her mom, “I do not see the love in his eyes mom. I see care, maybe sympathy too but the love is missing”. “He is probably busy with work and stressed out. Men are different so don’t expect them to show concern as women do. He loved you and that’s why he stuck with you. Don’t doubt him”, her mother snapped at her.

Abhilasha let it go .Maybe she was over thinking it. The events over the next 15 days made her head spin. A week from her doctors’ appointment she got a call from Shekhar that his parents had decided to not let him marry her as “There was no guarantee of her lifespan”. In fact, he even informed her that he was breaking the engagement and was about to get engaged to this girl his parents chose. The wedding was in a month. Shekhar was saying all this in a matter of fact way. As if this was the expected outcome. Abhilasha broke down. It was long overdue. The last year was overwhelming in itself and the only reason she pulled through was with the support of her family. Today Shekhar’s words struck a blow to the dam and it collapsed. Abhilasha went into depression and started hating herself. She blamed herself for everything. She hated her body, every time she looked into the mirror she saw an image of an unwanted person who could not be loved by anyone. The next few months were spent in depression. The stress and pain of seeing his daughter suffer had an impact on her fathers’ health too.

Abhilasha cut down on her friends and other social activities and became an introvert. A girl who used to be bubbly and full of life and spread cheer to the family was so quiet these days that it was impossible to sense she is in the same room. The thing that had hurt Abhilasha the most was Shekhar’s betrayal. After stringing her along for a year he tossed her in a day. Not just that, he even made her realize that he stood by her in bad times when he could very well have left her long ago. The feeling of being recipient of his sympathy was insulting to her. She probably will never be able to reconcile that. Abhilasha started feeling that the only emotion she could receive was sympathy and there was nothing more she was worth of.

Six years have passed. Abhilasha has done well for herself. She met a nice guy couple of years ago and has married him. They have a 1 year old daughter. Today, the ordeal she went through all those years ago seems distant and forgotten. Memories of Shekhar and his family are also fading away fast. The only question that remains is, whether the society acted fairly towards Abhilasha. Is treating as a woman as a machine to produce children fair? Is it fair to make a woman fight social barriers especially when she is fighting a disease too? Are we losing women to breast cancer because they are unwilling to seek the necessary help in time for the fear of being a social pariah? Today, as we plan to raise awareness on breast cancer, let us all take a vow to not pile on the misery of social obligations onto the women who are potentially fighting a physical and emotional battle.

So long….