Art, law and the violence of offence taking.

Since the end of the 1980s in India, groups associated with various political parties, religions, regions and castes have come to regularly attack artists and damage artworks. Straining relations between religious communities concomitant with the decline of secularism – as a practice if not as a norm – in Indian politics provides the context for such competitive and violent proclamations of 'hurt sentiments.' However, this paper focuses on the complementary explanations of how the rule of law has also come to not appear as a straightforward 'solution' to this 'problem.' It shows the fragility of the fundamental right of free speech and expression in India today, where the shifting legal regime is hardly an assurance against the concrete alternatives of lethal threats and violence, which have legitimized, over time, as Pratap Bhanu Mehta has argued, 'the insidious idea that it was not the state's job to protect freedom, but to discipline that freedom in the name of some conception of propriety' (Mehta, 2012). To be sure, the focus of this paper is not to slam vigilant, and even, as many would argue, necessary laws and regulatory bodies, but to explore how the legal reasoning and workings might have actually come to be a rational choice for offence-takers, to develop theoretically and apply practically in their endeavours. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]