|
|
Punjab Police Boss wants to change
the shape of things after 143 years
DGP suggests reforms in the 1861
Act, sends artistes scurrying for cover
S P Singh PUNJAB POLICE's sense of
humour is tingled. 143 years after the outdated Punjab Police
Act 1861, top police boss in the state has come up with a
reformed version which will make sure the state's jails would
soon ring out with some loud laughter.
LOL!
Every comedian worth his salt would be
behind bars soon.
Things sometimes do run the logical course
even in the labyrinthine corridors of regimes. Not very long
ago, Punjab's Principal Secretary (Home) Sanjit K Sinha had
bashed up two well-known comedians right in his office, next to
the Chief Minister's office in the Civil Secretariat. That was a
good lesson for those who take the powers-that-be too casually.
But the two hit back after a few months with a CD, cracking
jokes at Sinha's expense.
Lesson learnt: A century-and-a-half later,
it is time to wake up, change the rules and reject all appeals
to (non)sense of humour.
Set up on the direct orders of CM Amarinder
Singh, here is what the panel appointed by Director General of
Police A A Siddiqui has come up with in its Punjab Police Bill
draft:
-- Cracking any joke about any cop is
BANNED. Remember, if caught, even the judiciary shall not have
the powers to either fine OR imprison you. It will only have the
option to fine AND imprison you.
-- Those like Jaspal Bhatti, who have
almost made an art form out of earning a living by making fun of
the cops, would now have to tell every single joke, wisecrack or
repartee about cops to the cops beforehand for clearance, less
your morality is seriously affected.
"Why don't they simply ban me?" Bhatti
asked innocently. He rushed to add he wasn't joking. Seems like
he has read the draft Bill. It's not safe to be joking anymore.
Prior scrutiny and granting of suitability certificates will be
regulated by police (Section 51.x.iii)
-- All musicals, dance programmes, mimicry
shows, theatre or other performances for public amusement would
have to get a licence from area police boss. (Section 51.x.i)
-- Police will render this service "in the
interest of decency and morality" (S.51.x.)
-- If you are planning to stage a
nukkar-natak with a shoe-string budget and it features a
character playing a policeman also, please get a proper swanky
uniform for him. If you go penny-pinching, and there is a star
or an epaulette missing, the next performance would be behind
bars only (S.96.1).
-- And woe begone the repertory where
someone addresses a character wearing an IG's stripes as a DIG,
or vice-versa. Not just the man who didn't rehearse his lines
properly, but every single person connected with the performance
will be prosecuted. And as we told you, it is six months AND
fine.
-- No movie can feature any cop in bad
light. And if a cop perceived you have sneaked in a reference
which really doesn't present him in the role of a
shravan-putra, the punishment is for the entire unit,
producer and director thrown in (S 96.2). Jail AND fine, of
course.
-- As for minor matters like where to
fasten your horse if you have one, you would need a cop to
decide it for you (S.51.1.q). The draft Bill doesn't mention
whether you can call up a dial-in helpline and ask for some
horse-sense.
-- Ever since the mutiny of 1857, which had
prompted the 1861 Act, cops have become very sensitive about
certain things, though we never noticed. So `wantonly
discharging a fire-arm' is now equated with lighting a bonfire
outside your house (Section 51.1.u). Now, that is some
ecological sensitivity.
A fire's a fire anyday, and no smoking gun
would be spared, even if it is a heap of hay.
-- How is the police equipped for assessing
literary merits of a theatrical performance or a stage
production? Now, that can be taken as a very unkind joke since
the draft Bill has already taken care of this aspect. The DGP
will appoint for this purpose a panel which will have
"knowledge of and experience in literature, the theatre and
other matters." (S 51.1.x.iii). Ever seen a CV which mentions
'Experience in Literature' column?
-- Cops think of everything. The police
would also regulate, of course "in the interest of public
order", the employment of the artistes and "the conduct of the
artistes and audience at such performance" (Section 51.1.x.ii).
Ungrateful artistes have failed to see that cops are on their
side.
And are busy telling jokes. So funny! Don't
laugh, there's a cop around the corner.■
ABCDE
See
also:
Cops script reformed version of Police
Act, so be prepared for police state
Print this article
|
| |
| |
Before
Story magazine, founded in 1931 by journalist and editor
Whit Burnett and his first wife, Martha Foley, moved to America,
it was edited in the island of Palma, Majorca (off the coast of
Spain) and printed on the local press. The typesetter was a
worthy and painstaking fellow, but unfortunately his font
included no "w"s. Issues of Story brought out
during that period have little holes scattered all through the
page where the "w"s should have been. In the spirit of good,
clean fun, Ms Foley once wrote a short story that did not
contain a single "w". Edward O'Brien reprinted it in his
anthology of the best stories of the year.
Phil
Baker, master of ceremonies of the popular radio show called
Take It or Leave It, received a letter – possibly
from his press agent – which read, “Dear Phil: Here’s a real
$64 question for you. Will you lend me $64?”
Triumph
of tact: Miss Marlene Dietrich had her picture taken and fumed
at the result. “I can’t understand it,” she said. “The last time
I posed for you, the photographs were heavenly.” “Ah, yes,”
sighed the camera man, “but you must remember that I was eight
years younger then.” |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
