Legal Frustrations: Part 1

"Ignorance of law cannot be pleaded" so shouts some legal maxim! It is assumed that every person who resides in the country or who is residing in the country (irrespective of him being a resident of the same), knows the law of the land. So if one is charged for committing a particular act as it is against the law of the land, then he cannot plead on the grounds that he was ignorant of the fact that such an act is not allowed by the law of that State. So law expects each and every citizen of the country to know the law. so every citizen needs to understand the law. But then I look at the bare act and find statements running 10 to 12 lines which can be explained in just a single line. Here is an example:
______________________________________________________

If I want to state: "I would like to have a cup of coffee, less sugar and more milk"

______________________________________________________

Then the Indian Restaurant Act, 1901 will quote the same line in such simple words:

______________________________________________________

SCHEDULE II

19: Rules regarding placement of an order
.
.
.
.
.
(23) Less sugar and more milk

a) Coffee shall be any coffee as defined under Sec. 2(35) and cup shall be any cup as defined under Sec. 2(19) or any such vessel that shall have the ability to hold as much volume of liquid that can be held by a cup as defined under Sec. 2(19) and where vessel shall be any vessel as defined under Sec. 2(76) and liquid shall be any liquid as defined under Sec. 2(54) and milk shall be any milk as defined under Sec. 2(23) and sugar shall be any sugar as defined under Sec. 2(17) of the Act.

b) The placement of order where order shall be anything as defined under Sec. 2(12) for less of sugar and more of milk where less shall be anything that can be lesser than the original quantity of sugar that shall be added to the coffee according to the rules of that particular restaurant but which shall not be less than that quantity of sugar which under normal circumstances any competent person would consider necessary and shall not be acting under any coercion or undue influence or fraud or mistake where coercion shall be coercion as defined under Sec. 15 of Indian Contract Act, 1872 for the purpose of this Section and undue influence shall be as undue influence as defined under Sec. 16 of Indian Contract Act, 1872 for the purpose of this Section and fraud shall be fraud as defined under Sec. 17 of Indian Contract Act, 1872 for the purpose of this Section and mistake shall be any mistake of fact as defined under Sec. 19(1) of Indian Contract Act, 1872 for the purpose of this Section and such lesser sugar shall not be lesser than that quantity of sugar which a competent person acting under normal circumstances and not under coercion or fraud or undue influence or mistake shall as per his judgment in normal circumstance shall consider as necessary and more of milk can be anything that shall be more than the original volume of milk which shall be added to the coffee according to the rules of that particular restaurant but which shall not be less than that volume of milk which under normal circumstances any competent person not acting under any coercion or undue influence or fraud or mistake and shall consider it necessary to add to the coffee.

c) If the provisions of the above mentioned clause (b) are not met with then a compensation which shall not be less than the cost of the coffee as per that restaurant menu where menu shall be any such document of contents as defined under Sec. 2(9) shall be paid to the aggrieved customer where customer shall be any such individual as defined under Sec. 2(2).

______________________________________________________

Yes my dear friends! This has to be understood by a common man! If one fails to understand this then he shall be penalised! Exactly why lawyers are needed, so they simplify this shit and use it as per their convenience to kick their client's ass where client shall be any such individual as defined under Sec. 2(...) :P


(to be continued..)

Dhoom 2 - The Crucification

I am feeling criminal to blog on this topic for 2 reasons:

01) I am wasting my time on things not worth talking about.
02) I am wasting my blog space and misusing my freedom of blogging for free.

But I still intend to go ahead and abuse my freedom of expression for reasons like these:
I read some article in the newspaper where a kid stole his uncle's money to watch this movie and a few days back some kid killed himself as he was not allowed to see this movie.

So my advice:
Please let them go ahead and watch the movie; trust me, that will serve them as a punishment enough! Never again will they ever insist on watching some movie just because it is over-hyped. They will mature right away to think before acting desperate to watch some movie just because the promoter's begging them to. So in a way, this post is for a social cause.

Things I learnt from this movie:
01) Queen of England's bodyguards cannot aim at a stable standing body.
02) One can use a skateboard to protect oneself from the bullets.
(The rumors are strong that the Mithun Chakraborthy's concept of splitting the bullet into two parts is being researched upon. The dynamics and the probabilities are all being calculated for implementing them in Dhoom 3).
03) One can stay submerged in waters for as long as possible and as silent as possible using a water scooter. Submarines are outdated now!
04) Aishwarya Rai should give up on acting.
05) Abhishek Bachan should join a gym and fast! His belly is quite well pronounced when Hritik stands besides him and he gives a tough competition to Aishwarya Rai when it comes to biceps!
06) Bipasha has one of the best butts Indian cinema's ever seen!
07) Sunehari lives in Andheri. Sunehari Andheri.
08) I am hot = I am feeling hot.
09) Bipasha's bikini is "cute". (Becca said so, so it must be true. All I care for is "what lies beneath")
10) One has to love someone so much that one should be able to kill this loved one for the sake of love. (It is a really complicated phenomenon, only seen to be understood)
11) Mumbai cops use helicopters.
12) A thief steals one night and is the item-boy or item-girl the next night!
13) To get the attention of some dude, all a chick has to do is, place two fingers before one's eyes and ask, "So are you like checking me out?"
14) Wear a Hawaiian shirt over a "Rolling Lips". That's fashion for you man! Ask AB!
15) Brazil has given up Latino and Samba, Punjabi pop-shit's the in-thing there!
16) Aishwarya should learn to walk and stand like a normal female. Ramp is not the only place females walk on!
17) The movie should've done away with:
The songs, the director and the production unit, the dialogue/script writer, the story writer (if there was one), Rimi Sen, Bipasha Basu, Uday Chopra, Aishwarya Rai and rest other jokers, even Abhishek Bachan. The movie could've just been about Hritik Roshan and the way he steals and it would've still done as well!
18) This movie is equivalent to movies like Kaal, Veer Zara and Waqt (the other crappy movies I was made to see in a theatre).

The list really goes on but really, I am sleepy now and I have spent good 20 minutes on this post, wasting even a single second more would be unjust towards me, you and the movie (cause it just doesn't deserve it).

Trust me, even if I intend to make a spoof on this one, I can't, as the movie is a spoof in itself!

My Rating: 0.005/10