I must be cruel only to be kind

I must be cruel only to be kind

thus being bad and worse remains behind?

 William Shakespeare

A brief synopsis might put the answer in the proper context. Hamlet's father has just been murdered, a ghost claiming to be his deceased father claims he was killed by his brother Claudius who then marries Hamlet's mother, Gertrude. While talking to his mother in her bedroom, Hamlet hears a spy behind the curtains and kills him, thinking it to be his uncle. It is not; it is his girlfriend's father Polonius.

The full speech delivered may also shed some light on the discussion.

 
For this same lord
I do repent: but heaven hath pleased it so, 
To punish me with this and this with me, 
That I must be their scourge and minister. 
I will bestow him and answer well 
The death I gave him. So again good night. 
I must be cruel to be kind: 
Thus bad begins and only worse remains behind.

Hamlet is sorry that he killed Polonius, but says fatalistically 'heaven hath pleased it so to punish me with this.' He is imagining that heaven wants someone to be the 'scourge and minister' to punish Polonius and Hamlet is the lucky guy.

As for the phrase 'I must be cruel to be kind', imagine this as a tough love approach. Hamlet believes that fate has put him in the position of the man who has to clean up the corrupt Danish court, but in order to do so, he must take some unpleasant measures. He is warning his mother that Polonius is not the only one who will be killed. He is preparing her for his intended killing of Claudius; the bad beginning is the murder of Polonius and the worse that remains behind is the killing of Claudius. But, he explains, although killing people may seem 'cruel', in the end, it is for the best, so in the long run killing Polonius and Claudius will be 'kind' for Denmark.

The Finance minister saying with smirk on his face that

“I must be cruel to be kind: 
Thus

 bad begins

 and

 only

 worse remains behind.”

And with that the bad begins and worse would be prevalent throughout the year until the FM showers his smile again next time. till then . Let the people keep on looking where the KINDness of has been lost.

It is not acceptable that Finance Minister is not be aware of the circumstances, when Shakespeare Helmet said the above sentence to his mother. Besides many amendments and incorporation of new clauses instantly, prospectively and retrospectively the one prominent amendment, which is required to be read in its fine printing is:-

Section begins with :-

“Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for time being in force or not, by whatever named called either enacted or not including the Constitution of India.

Be it advised or warned to the resident of India or  any other person having any links or association  or  even shake hand proximity with any person ,in any part of the world , that if being aggrieved by any of the judgment, decision, award ,assessment or any order as affecting the mental serenity, financial capacity, morality etc, files any appeal to higher authority and being unsuccessful there, knocking the door of the highest court and having been attained the victory in his case against the government of India, shall beware that the situation arose due to the aforesaid victory shall not be permanent, (with the global principle that nothing is permanent on this earth) and  shall not be tolerated to remain so and the government of India by following the stick rule of MIGHT is RIGHT shall wane and wither the  victory  by amending  enacting or  twisting the law as may be required to take the revenge of the defeat and made it so retrospectively, even to make it applicable to the fathers  and forefathers of the assessee. So dare not be aggrieved of any decision, command, order or judgment of the Government,

 Since we possess the only and only unique thing that is THE POWER, and as such, We the Govt of India will maintain the self-esteem with all the might even, if we, become inglorious or  have to tear off  or change the basic web of the constitution.”

On the line of the above, the lustrous example of our deed is that:-.

We have exempted the RBI from wealth tax retrospectively since 1957-58 even prior to the enactment of Income tax Act, which was in 1961, and the saga of mobile phone company, who remained mobile and will remain so from pillar to post.

Once Sh Ram Jethmalani on retrospective amendments had said, “that if the practice of retrospective amendments of the law is continued like this, then the days are not far, when the Govt will declare all the prostitutes as virgin with retrospective effect.

It reminds of the days, when the Hon’ble Nani Ji, in Keshvanand Bharti case: He brought in his complete legal expertise and repertoire to sustain a unique proposition.” Whatever be the width of the  amending power in the constitution you can not by any kind of majority vote alter or destroy the basic structure  and the frame work”   and with this proposition the India was saved from demise of its democracy. Those were the days.

Harish Chander Bhatia

Advocate