Talk:R. Balakrishna Pillai

Corruption Charges and first minister jailed
"The prosecution case was that Mr. Pillai, who was the Electricity Minister in the UDF government during 1980-87, caused a pecuniary loss of about Rs. 2 crore to the KSEB by awarding contracts for the construction of a power tunnel and surge shaft of the Idamalayar project to K.P. Poulose (now deceased) at “extraordinarily high rates.”

Writing the judgment, Justice Sathasivam said, “The State government initiated a prosecution in 1991 and trial prolonged up to November 19, 1999. Thereafter, the matter was kept pending at the High Court from 1999 to October 2003, when the High Court pronounced its order acquitting all the accused and the matter was taken up to this court by the present appellant initially by way of a special leave petition in 2005.”

The Bench held that the prosecution had proved that works of Idamalayar were awarded at a very high and exorbitant rate with special conditions having heavy financial implications by reducing the retention and security amount and by allowing the contractor to return only 50 per cent of the empty cement bags."

The hindu, 10 February 2011.

This is only one of the many court/corruption cases Balakrishna Pillais facing. And many of is cabinet colleagues are also facing similar court cases. In this context any person with neutral point of view can only agree with the following statement:

"He (Balakrishnapillai) is discredited for corruption and was part of a regime which fostered unscrupulous political culture in Kerala Society and earned much opprobrium from the public.

This statement can be rightly included in wikipedia. Also please note that He is the first minister to be jailed for corruption charges in the history of Kerala.


 * Balakrishna Pillai has a special place in the history, that he is the first ever Kerala minister who is imprisoned on account of corruption. Otherwise, he is an ordinary politician, running his own miniscule political outfit. If he has to be remembered by history, it is only because he is in jail for Criminal conspiracy. (That is the word used by Supreme Court). Any one who is sentenced for rigorous imprisonment is a Criminal. Bala Krishna Pillai is a known Criminal and a controversial personality. It is publicly known that he is associated with some caste outfit. There are a number of online members, who due to caste consideration justifying a criminal. The best way to describe a criminal is to call him a criminal. Why we are calling him a criminal? Simply because it is a fact, now recorded in the history. Wikipedia pages can not be used to play cheap caste and political game and hide this simple fact. And BalaKrishna Pillai is not the only one criminal who are facing corruption charges in that regime. There are many other ministers. (T.M. Jacob is another example.) And it is not the only one case in which Pillai is sentenced by court. Wheteher we like it or not, BalaKrishna Pillai will be known in the history as the first criminal who was sentenced for corruption charges. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.206.14.245 (talk) 11:33, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
 * IP, we are not here for judging a person criminal or not. This is encyclopedia, where we need to follow certain policies and guidelines, especially when it comes to to biographies of living person. The problem is that the Hindu article you cited as a source is merely reporting the story of court verdict. It doesn't make any judgment on the person. Thus, the statement you included in the article amounts to synthesis of published material that advances a position. Please refrain from doing so. Salih  ( talk ) 12:10, 5 March 2011 (UTC)


 * The News paper article, cited (along with hundreds of other news articles), says that Balakrishna Pillai is sentenced for doing criminal conspiracy. Normally, which word does a Biography use to describe a criminal? If not "criminal" ?

Merriam Webster dictionary explains the meaning of "Criminal"-

Definition of CRIMINAL

-- guilty of crime; also : of or befitting a criminal

-- relating to, involving, or being a crime

-- relating to crime or to the prosecution of suspects in a crime. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.206.0.86 (talk) 20:48, 5 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Merriam Webster dictionary also define theif:
 * Definition of THIEF
 * one that steals especially stealthily or secretly; also : one who commits theft or larceny
 * Now, I think you will agree with me that all human beings, at some point of time in their life, would have stolen something or other. Will you call the entire humanity thief? Please see the context also. Salih  ( talk ) 06:35, 6 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Wow! How did you reach to that starling conclusion? To the best of my knowledge, significant number of people whom I know, have never stolen anything in their life. I know people who even refuse to take a single coin they find on the roadside. And if any one refuses to subscribe to this view, please verify with psychologists/ other experts to find out the scientific opinion on this. (though it is irrelevant here, I dont rememeber a single instance in my life).

It is true that there are a large number of people, some of them highly educated, with this tendency. And people with kleptomania may get thrill in getting associated with the act of theft, directly or indirectly.

Here is the definition - Kleptomania is a complex psychological disorder. Such individuals shows the tendency to steal things. And often they cant resist this tendency. They show consistent, failed attempts to stop stealing.

It is noteworthy that, detection of kleptomania, even by significant others, is difficult and the disorder often proceeds undetected.

I would like to get the opinion of other editors and readers on this. Otherwise, wikipedia will end up a forum for people to justify each other. Why wikipedia should shy away from highlighting this most important aspect of his life (subject of the article here).

I strongly object to the sweeping remarks made above. People with kleptomania may not be that small in numbers. But to argue that all are having this tendency is objectionable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.206.2.3 (talk) 03:49, 8 March 2011 (UTC)