It is not unusual for the judiciary, in the discharge of its duties, to seek external help and opinion (“Taking on the gatekeepers”, December 29). In the Aruna Shanbaug case, the judiciary constituted a medical team to evaluate her condition and much emphasis was placed on the medical report. In fact, the examination by the medical team was videographed and screened in court. When that was the case, what is the harm in soliciting opinions from people who may have better knowledge of a sensitive subject? Pliability is essential when there is a lurking doubt. Seen from this angle, referring the film Padmavati to the “royal family” and historians seems eminently correct. If writers and columnists have freedom of expression, why not for those who are in the know of things?
V. Lakshmanan,
Tirupur, Tamil Nadu
