Lost taste
Sir — Those who have watched television in the Nineties would remember an advertisement for paneer where a man who has lost his memory regains it upon tasting a familiar paneer dish. New research shows that the ad might have been right. Food and the memories it evokes, it has been found, can help comfort dementia patients. But what happens when the taste of food itself changes? Nothing tastes the same anymore — paneer is now mass-produced with cheap vegetable oil, fish are fattened with steroids and rice is polished to make it fancy. With nothing tasting the same, one wonders whether those losing their memory will even recognise the food they eat.
Bondita Das,
Calcutta
Shadow of doubt
Sir — Reports claim that Justice Yashwant Varma, the second senior-most judge in the Delhi High Court, was asked to be transferred after a large volume of cash was discovered from his house. The apex court has denied the report as misinformation (“SC denies judge shift, silent on ‘cash’ claim”, Mar 22). Irrespective of the truth of this news, it raises important questions about the mechanisms in place to address judicial misconduct. The in-house procedure and the impeachment process remain largely ineffective, given that no judge has ever been impeached or convicted. Judicial transparency and accountability must be prioritised to restore public confidence in the judiciary. Reforms to allow for independent investigations and judicial scrutiny are crucial. Until such reforms are enacted, allegations of corruption will continue to erode the integrity of the judicial system.
Dattaprasad Shirodkar,
Mumbai
Sir — The case of the judge, Yashwant Varma, highlights the flaws in India’s judicial accountability. The in-house procedure, while intended to address corruption, has proven insufficient, as judges rarely face prosecution. Furthermore, the constitutional requirement of impeachment is practically unfeasible given the political complexities involved. A lack of transparency and accountability undermines public trust in the judiciary. To prevent further erosion of the system’s credibility, urgent reforms are needed, including greater scrutiny and independence for investigative bodies.
Pratima Manimala ,
Howrah
Sir — The judiciary’s handling of corruption allegations is fundamentally flawed. Justice Yashwant Varma’s case is just one example of how the current mechanisms have failed to produce meaningful consequences. No judge has been convicted or impeached despite numerous corruption allegations which points to a serious gap in accountability. For the public to maintain trust in the judiciary, a re-evaluation of these processes is required, with more robust measures for investigating and prosecuting corruption.
D.V.G. Sankara Rao,
Andhra Pradesh
Sir — The recent corruption allegations against a Delhi High Court judge bring to light the weaknesses in our judicial accountability framework. The judiciary must be open to external scrutiny and steps should be taken to ensure that corruption cases involving judges are investigated thoroughly, without any political interference or immunity from prosecution.
A.G. Rajmohan,
Anantapur
Sir — The lack of convictions or impeachments for judicial corruption in India reflects a systemic flaw. The shielding of judges from external scrutiny only serves to erode public confidence. Comprehensive reforms are essential to hold judges accountable and ensure that corruption is addressed transparently and efficiently, without political or institutional obstacles.
Akhilesh Krishnan,
Mumbai
Content control
Sir — Elon Musk’s X (formerly Twitter) has challenged the Indian government’s use of Section 79(3)(b) of the Information Technology Act. This is an important legal issue. By claiming that the government is bypassing safeguards in place under Section 69A, the platform raises concerns about the undue concentration of power in content regulation. If upheld, such actions could set a dangerous precedent for unchecked censorship. It is vital that the judiciary safeguards the procedural protections established in the Shreya Singhal case to protect freedom of speech online.
Jang Bahadur Singh,
Jamshedpur
Sir — X’s legal challenge against the government’s use of Section 79(3)(b) highlights a concerning erosion of legal safeguards for content moderation. The government’s directive undermines the protections provided by Section 69A, which allows for content blocking only under specified grounds. This shift in policy risks unchecked censorship and raises broader concerns about the future of free speech on digital platforms. It is crucial that courts ensure the government’s actions remain within the framework of constitutional protections.
T. Ramadas,
Visakhapatnam
Sir — The potential for increased government control over content moderation without judicial oversight could severely impact the free flow of information.
Manas Mukhopadhyay,
Hooghly