I have long held the view that when it comes to all matters ridiculous, the Shiv Sena and the MNS are usually at the head of the pack. For two parties that are constantly at loggerheads, they seem to be in agreement on one thing – Maria Susairaj should never act again.
While the representative from the MNS says, “Maria is convicted for a heinous crime and we will not allow her to work at any cost”, the Shiv Sena says, “People with a criminal background come out of the jail and become stars in television shows”. This of course coming from two parties which have never thought twice about fielding candidates who have criminal records and convictions. Apparently, you need an “untainted” record to work in television but can be a career criminal for the simple task of running a state.
And so the parties try to dictate terms to producers like Ram Gopal Varma about whom he chooses to cast in his movies. If every convicted criminal were to be prevented from working after serving a sentence, at least the Lok Sabha would have fewer scams to worry about.
The important issue that is raised here is, when does a criminal completely pay off his debt to society? Susairaj, was convicted not for murder but for destruction of evidence was sentenced to three years. She has already been jailed for that period of time and has been let go. In the eyes of the law, it is immaterial how grisly a crime and how much publicity it garners. The fact remains that an eminent member of the judiciary, which is one of the last respectable institutions in India, decided that her crime merited a certain sentence and delivered the said judgement.
But it is never that simple. As if one judgement is not enough, a convicted criminal is judged by every single person he comes in contact with. They find it difficult to get employment, to rejoin society as they left it and are subject to prejudice.
Some may say that they ought to have thought about it before they broke the law but the question is, is it really society to whom criminals owe a debt? To some extent, a punishment can be viewed as a surety that criminals offer in exchange for being reintegrated into society. But is it so simple?
Susairaj will soon pass out of public consciousness and so will the murder of Neeraj Grover but wherever she goes, the fact that Maria was part of something horrific might probably never let her be at peace with herself. The debt to yourself is surely one that can never be repaid in full.
Be Serhiyass! 
The last line says it all.
I agree ! debt to yourself….to hell with society !
An interesting point of view. The first time I heard Ram Gopal Verma was planning to cast her for his movie, I found the idea of making this movie highly ridiculous. The point of casting her or not is secondary. One movie on a notorious and well fought back Delhi murder was a good watch for the Indian audience and I am sure it had some message to put across and it did. Wonder what this case and the subsequent RGV movie would have to offer. People may argue that every film maker has a right to make what he wants. We can choose to not watch. But then shooting this movie in the same building ( which btw was a troubling fact for the residents there) and then offering to cast Maria is too much of rubbing things the unnecessary way. It is not exactly wrong I agree, but it isnt really required. I agree with your point that so much can be dug out about politicians and also that this issue will die its natural death and Maria will be forgotten. Loved the last line. Still believe, RGV could do better things in life. He really should learn to not shove his nosy film-making attitude up the ass of controversy every time. Someone should introduce him to the beauty of fiction.
Who are we to decide what is required or not? Not every filmmaker wants to make a movie which gets a message across. Many just want to make money and entertain. Should we castigate them for that?
Then again, this is not a question of what Ram Gopal Varma should do and should not. This is about a woman who committed a crime and paid her penalty. Why does any political party have any right to prevent her from doing anything which is constitutionally legal?