HONI ANHONI TV SERIAL AND THE MONKEY TRIAL

Doordarshan had come out with a serial Honi Anhoni.  It had episodes that encouraged belief in supernatural.  This was sought to be prohibited. Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court granted interim injunction restraining the Doordarshan to telecast it. But in Odyssey Communications Pvt. Ltd. Vs Lokvidayan Sangathan AIR 1988 SC 1642 (the Honi Anhonee case) our Supreme Court allowed the appeal and permitted the telecast.  

Scene from 'Honi Anhoni', where a dead girl comes back every year on date of his death.

Darwin's 'Origin of Species' was banned in US.  In 1920's Scopes, a biology teacher was prosecuted for teaching Origin of Species.  This case is commonly referred to as the Monkey Trial. 

There was another statute Balanced Treatment for Creation-Science and Evolution-Science in Public School Instruction Act (Creationism Act) in the State of Louisiana, US.  Its vires was challenged in Edwards Vs Aguilard (482 US 510).

This article is a comparative study of these cases. 

Honi-Anhonee TV Serial 

What Honi Anhonee TV serial has got to do with the Monkey Trial.  Well, it depends on how you look at it. 

Honi Anhonee was a television serial. It was televised every Thursday on Doordarshan.  Many did not like it. It encouraged a blind belief in the supernatural and other superstitions; it spread an unscientific way of thinking. 

Sometime later, a Pune based social organisation filed a writ petition in the Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court to restrain the telecast of the serial. The High Court issued an interim order restraining the airing of further episodes.  The producer of the serial took the case to the Supreme Court.  

The Supreme Court stayed the operation of the interim order and allowed the serial to be telecast.  It was held that: 

• The right of a citizen to exhibit films of his own viewpoint on Doordarshan is a part of the fundamental right of freedom of expression guaranteed under Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution of India; 
• The right of expression could only be curtailed under the conditions set down under Article 19 (2) of the Constitution of India; 
• The serial was neither against any specific law nor was there any loss to the public exchequer. 

The court in taking this view misdirected the Government to be party to such a serial.

The serial was not being televised on a private channel but was being televised on Doordarshan, the Government's channel. It encouraged blind faith on the supernatural and unscientific thinking. The Government itself should not have permitted such a serial to be televised. Unfortunately, the court's attention was neither drawn to this aspect nor did it choose to consider this aspect and to draw the Government's attention to it. 

However, this does not clarify as to what this case has to do with ‘The Monkey Trial’ and by the way, what is the monkey trial.  But before we discuss it, let's talk about Charles Darwin (See End Note-1). 

Charles Darwin-Origin of Species

Charles Darwin - courtesy Wikipedia

Charles Darwin was born on February 12th, 1809.  He was son of a medical practitioner, but he chose not to follow his father’s profession. He thought of becoming a cleric then he dropped that as well. 

In 1831, Drawin was a young man of 22, without any career and with his future in ruins.  It is at this time that he received a letter inviting him to sail around the world on HMS Beagle as a naturalist. This not only changed his world but the World as well. 

Darwin returned after five years from his voyage with some astonishing theories about the origin of species, that rocked the foundation of the Christian world. So revolutionary was his idea that he could not bring about to publish his theories. After all at some point of time in his life he had wanted to become a cleric and his wife was a devout Christian. It is only when he received a letter from Alfred Russel Wallace (See End Note- 2) a young naturalist that he dared to publish his theories as the origin of species. 

The Origin of Species created enemies; strongest amongst them were the upholders of orthodox religious beliefs.  If the theory of evolution was true then the account of creation in the Book of Genesis was false; and if evolution worked automatically, there was no room for divine guidance. 

So controversial was Darwin's theory of evolution that the first edition of his book Origin of Species was sold out within 24 hours of its publication. A record yet to be equalled. 

It was about 'Origin of Species' that most talked about debate of all times took place.  It was between Bishop Samuel Wilberforce and Thomas Henry Huxley.  The debate was held in 1860 at the meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science at Oxford University. 

Bishop Samuel had decided that this gathering presented an opportunity to squash the ‘dangerous’ new evolutionary theory.  He was a good orator. Huxley sat quietly, while the bishop spoke with inimitable spirit, emptiness and unfairness. 

Samuel made the fatal error of voicing an offensive personal inquiry about Huxley's simian ancestry, whereupon Huxley murmured to his neighbour, 

‘The Lord has delivered him into my hands.’ 

Soon Huxley was called to reply. This he did with devastating effect.   

‘If . . . the question is put to me, would I rather have a miserable ape for a grandfather or a man highly endowed by nature and possessed of great means of influence, and yet who employs these faculties and that influence for the mere purpose of introducing ridicule into a grave scientific discussion ... I unhesitatingly affirm my preference for the ape.’

The Monkey Trial

The Christian fundamentalists did not appreciate the Origin of Species. In some of the states in America there was a strong move to enact an anti-evolution law. In March 1925, the Tennessee legislature passed a law (Butler Act) almost unanimously (See End Note-3). It declared the teaching of any doctrine, denying the divine creation of man as taught in the Bible, unlawful.  It banned the theory of evolution as propounded by Darwin.  

John T Scopes, a high school teacher, decided to violate it as a test case and the Civil Liberties Union promised to defend him. 

Scopes was arrested and indicted by a grand jury for teaching the theory of evolution. His trial attracted world-wide attention and came to be known as The Monkey Trial. 

William Hennings Bryan led the prosecution, and the defence lawyer was Clarence Darrow. 

Bryan opened the case with the remark, 'The trial uncovers an attack on religion. If evolution wins, Christianity goes.’ 

Darrow retorted, ‘Scopes is not on trial, civilisation is on trial.’ During the trial, the courtroom echoed with laughter, applause, and demonstration. 

There was a chance that the floor of the court room might give way. The judge ordered the trial to be transferred to the courthouse lawn.  The Judge, Jury, and counsel were seated on the raised platform and below the platform tables were set out for newspaper, telegraph and radiomen. The lawn was filled with 5000 spectators. It is described by the New York Times as 'the most amazing court scene in Anglo Saxon history'. It is in this surrounding that ‘The Monkey Trial’, took place. 

William Jennings Bryan (seated at left) being interrogated by Clarence Darrow, during the trial of State of Tennessee vs. John Thomas Scopes

The defence was prevented by the judge from producing any expert to prove the authenticity of the theory of evolution.  At this stage Darrow asked his adversary if he would like to testify as an expert on the Bible.  

The offer was accepted and Bryan, the chief prosecuting counsel, entered the witness box. But by doing so he invited his own doom. Darrow tore him apart during cross-examination. Bryan died soon after the trial. Many say he could not withstand Darrow's cross-examination. 

The next day the judge ruled to strike out Bryan's entire testimony.  This sealed the fate of the defence case. It was admitted that Scopes had taught the theory of evolution. 

After eight days of trial, the jury took only nine minutes to hold Scopes guilty of the crime. He was ordered to pay a 100$ fine.   When the judge's attention was brought that he had not heard the defendant before imposing fine, Scopes was permitted to speak. It was for the first and the only time, he spoke in court.  

Scopes said,

'Your honour, I feel that I have been convicted of violating an unjust statute. I will continue in the future, as I have in the past, to oppose this law in any way I can. Any other action would be in violation of my ideal of academic freedom—that is, to teach the truth as guaranteed in our constitution, of personal and religious freedom. I think the fine is unjust.' 

The matter did not rest there. An appeal was taken to the Tennessee Supreme Court. The decision was reversed, surprisingly, not on the merits of the case but on a technicality.  

The Supreme Court of Tennessee held that the conviction was illegal as the judge instead of the jury had fixed the amount of fine.  Three of the judges held that the anti-evolution law was constitutional, while only one judge held the law to be unconstitutional.

Anti Evolution Law―Illegal

The Eperson Case

Arkansas was one of the State that had Anti-evolution Law. Ultimately Susan Eperson challenged this law. It was unanimously declared illegal on 12.11.1968 (Eperson V Arkansas: 393 US 97: 21 LEd 2d 228). The Court held that, 'Arkansas' law cannot be defended as an act of religious neutrality. Arkansas did not seek to excise from the curricula of its schools and universities all discussion of the origin of man. The law's effort was confined to an attempt to blot out a particular theory because of its supposed conflict with the Biblical account, literally read. Plainly, the law is contrary to the mandate of the first and is violation of the fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution.' 

Later, the anti-evolution laws were repealed. But the controversy did not end there.  It arose again in the 1980's.  This time, it came in the form of creationism. 

The Edwards Case

In 1981, the State of Louisiana enacted a law known as 'Balanced Treatment for Creation-Science and Evolution-Science Act'. Broadly it states that Darwin's evolution theory should not be taught in schools. In case it was taught then creationism was also to be taught. This was challenged by a teacher called Donald Aguilard. This law was held to be ultra vires not only by the Louisiana Supreme Court but also by the Supreme Court of US on 19.6.1987 (Edwards V Aguillard, 482 US 578 96 L Ed 2d 510).   

The majority of the US Supreme Court held that creation science embodies the religious belief that a supernatural creator was responsible for the creation of mankind. It went on to say that the statute advances a religious doctrine and also seeks to employ the symbolic and financial support of the government to achieve religious purposes (See End Note-4)

 The Tammy Case

The religious fundamentalists did not accept defeat. They had published a book entitled 'Of Pandas and People'. This talks about creationism but uses the word, 'Intelligent Design' for the same. Broadly, it asserts that Universe, life, species are best explained by an intelligent cause and not by undirected process of natural selection. It is a refined version of creationism―without identifying the nature or identity of the designer. 

The religious fundamentalists also saw that the Dover Area School Board of Directors pass a resolution that 'Students will be made aware of gaps/ problems in Darwin’s theory and of other theories of evolution including, but not limited to, intelligent design'.

Subsequently, it was also announced that teachers would be required to read a statement in the ninth class biology class to the effect that Darwin's theory is not a fact and there is alternative view of 'Intelligent Design' (See End Note-5).

This was challenged in Tammy Kitzmiller V Dover Area School District. On  20.12.2005, the Supreme Court of USA issued a declaratory judgement in favour of Plaintiff and held that School's policy violated the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States and Articles 1 & 3 of the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The defendants were also permanently restrained from maintaining Intelligent Design Policy in any school within Dover Area District.

Conclusion

It was an important step taken by the American courts from a superstitious fundamentalist view to a scientific approach: from the monkey trial to the Tammy Kitzmiller case. A contrast to our Supreme Court decision in the Honi Anhonee Case, which instead of moving away from The Monkey Trial as the American Courts have done, has come closer to it. 

End Note-1: he year 2009 was the bicentennial birth anniversary of Charles Darwin and 150th year since publication of Origin of Species.  I have written a detailed article 'Gods are Dreams of Men' about the life of Charles Darwin.  It has been published in my book 'Musings of a Judge'.

End Note- 2: Wallace had proposed the theory of the origin of spices in his letter, but it lacked evidence. Darwin had collected evidence during his voyage round the world in HMS Beagle. 

End Note- 3: House of Representatives by seventy-five to five and the Senate by twenty-four to six.  It was known as Butler Act.  Such laws continued in US till 1968 till they were overruled in Epperson vs. Arkansas. 

End Note-4: The US Supreme Court observed as follows: 

'The Louisiana Creationism Act advances a religious doctrine by requiring either the banishment of the theory of evolution from public School classrooms or the presentation of a religious viewpoint that rejects evolution in its entirety. 
The Act violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment because it seeks to employ the symbolic and financial support of government to achieve a religious purpose.' 

End Note-5: The exact words of the statement were as follows:

The Pennsylvania Academic Standards require students to learn about Darwin’s Theory of Evolution and eventually to take a standardized test of which evolution is a part. 
Because Darwin’s Theory is a theory, it continues to be tested as new evidence is discovered. The Theory is not a fact. Gaps in the Theory exist for which there is no evidence. A theory is defined as a well-tested explanation that unifies a broad range of observations. 
Intelligent Design is an explanation of the origin of life that differs from Darwin’s view. The reference book, 'Of Pandas and People', is available for students who might be interested in gaining an understanding of what Intelligent Design actually involves. 
With respect to any theory, students are encouraged to keep an open mind. The school leaves the discussion of the Origins of Life to individual students and their families. As a Standards-driven district, class instruction focuses upon preparing students to achieve proficiency on Standards-based assessments.