Short run market solution Vs Long run kaminey solution

It so happens that swine flu is allegedly spreading like wild forest fire & Indian media is simply making things on ground look far graver than they actually are.As a result, my institution is closed and i am back in Delhi having all the time in the world to pursue.....well,nothing in specific.
So,with nothing to do i decided to give "Kaminey" a try and judge for myself whether Vishal Bhardwaj still has that Midas touch.It so happens that some scenes for this movie were shot at my institute "Gokhale Institute of Politics & Economics" which further incentivized me to give it a try (though my institute barely featured in 2 scenes & it took a lot of effort on my side to identify the same). Through the entire process i realized something very spectacular,something i always contemplated on, but could not explain to others, something that almost every Economics student and others discuss but cannot prove or disprove pragmatically.
We always argue on role of markets and the efficient outcomes it leads to, given that all relevant markets exists & are well defined for almost everything that matters both at production & consumption front. For those with a non economics background i elaborate on this via 2 random cases which are as follows:
1) Market for crude oil (assuming free market situation)

Here prices play a pivotal role in the sense that they reflect relative scarcity of this natural resource.When world demand rises, prices rise as per market mechanism so production rises & at the same time if production is constrained beyond a threshold limit demand falls due to higher prices. Thus, simple demand and supply mechanism is at work and equilibrium is attained at the intersection of demand and supply.

2) Steel firm & fishery along a river

In this case the problem is that unless steel firm faces a cost on polluting the water body,it keeps releasing industrial waste into the river & this eventually harms the output of the fishery.This is what is referred to as an externality. An externality of an economic transaction is an impact on a party that is not directly involved in the transaction. In such a case, prices do not reflect the full costs or benefits in production or consumption of a product or service.
In such a case an efficient outcome can be managed by imposing a cost of polluting on the steel firm so that it produces efficient amount of pollution.Think of it in this way, what would happen if the steel firm & fishery internalize ( imagine a single entity in "Arcelor-Mittal steel firm & fisheries"). In such a case this internalized firm would only produce (pollutants) to an extent where marginal damage to fishery from pollution equals marginal gains to steel entity from polluting (strictly in revenues term). Hence, less of pollutants are produced and disposed into the water body, This is an efficient outcome.In western societies this is managed by tools like pigouvian tax.

Now, fact is that there would always be a case for missing markets, but even if we account for all relevant markets, is market solution the best in terms of providing efficient outcomes? Could there be anything better?
In this blog i draw an analogy from "Kaminey" and try to visualize on a better social outcome assuming that relevant markets are in place. Now i start from the point where Charlie ( the one who has to toss up between fhortcut n chotta fhortcut) is having a bad day at the office.He has practically bet everything he possesses ( Rs. 1 lakh) on a coveted derby race. But at the last minute,he is double crossed as the race is fixed in their opponent's favour. He hunts down the jockey and plans to get even when the rival goons burst in. In the ensuing melee, Charlie and friends take off with a getaway car which contains heroin worth 10 crore (yes i know its a narcotic Anish a.k.a. gurudev) Not knowing that the car belongs to a ruthless pair of cops, Lobo and Lele, who run drugs for the drug lord,Tashi.Also, assume drugs are legal to avoid any confusion.
Now all that Charlie needs is 10 lakh rupees to set up his very own betting den (as per the movie). Assuming that he is put in direct contact with Lobo & Lele ( the corrupt cops who are suppliers to Tashi) and there is a trust factor between Charlie & these cops (in short, a market is in place),cops would be only happy to pay Rs. 10 lakh to save their arses from Tashi and Charlie would also agree on it as all he needs is rupees 10 lakh. The deal would be done and this would be an efficient outcome with everyone(within the existing set up) better off. Only problem with this solution is that players who do not participate in this market are just as better off ( if heroin is a GOOD) or worse off (if its a BAD) in both the circumstances as eventually they get the drugs they need ( or are compelled to buy due to addiction) either from Tashi or from someone else if Charlie sells off the drug consignment to some other drug lord. For now lets assume that drugs are bad ( as Mr. Mackey puts it in south park) and they make people, well........wasted. My entire point is that market may exist but people who bear a direct impact may decide( also think as capability issue) not to participate in the market process due to whatever constraints. So if Charlie & the cops get into an agreement both parties are better off and final consumers of drugs (sorry, its a narcotic as per gurudev Anish baba) are no worse off than before as they get the drugs they need either from Tashi or from someone else. ( Yes Mr. Nikhil Madan i am assuming both are minor players in the drug market & none of them can effect the market price or should i say illegal market price).
Now what actually happens is the movie is a far better outcome than one discussed above.The corrupt cops Lele & Lobo die,the drug lord Tashi also goes to the lake of fire (dies) along with his group of major baddies, a manipulative politician in Bhope bhau (Priyanka Chopra's brother) is taken care of,Charlie gets rich after he steals 2 diamonds from Tashi's man, Guddu & Sweety get married (also the twins Priyanka {Sweety} conceives are better off as they get a chance to live), entire drug consignment is also taken care of(its also put to ashes) & as i assumed drugs are bad above, thousands people are made better off.
To put things in perspective, an efficient long run solution is what is finally obtained which makes the entire society much better off than before.Now to draw back from the analogy what is it that makes this better outcome possible?
Well if we ponder over it we would realize that all weaker segments (in Guddu,Sweety & Charlie) had some sort of bargaining power associated with them.Charlie had the consignment of drugs worth 10 crore for which he needed just 10 lakh rupees, Sweety was Bhope Bhau's sister & Guddu (to his credit) had impregnated Sweety.
Come to think about it, even if corporate rivalry in India reaches new heights ( eg. Ambani war over KG basin & its reserves), corporates turn more "Kaminey" with extensive privatization, impending cartelization but people ( the consumers) have some sort market power ( more like better bargaining ability) say in terms of better legal framework to insure proposed as well as promised quality standards , better judicial protection from business malpractices & better information base besides others, an overall better solution with higher level of efficiency is possible. As we move towards more privatization (or even dilution of equity in PSU's, decentralization) the role of govt. also has to evolve to one with better monitoring & regulating capabilities. Thus what i am vouching for is more power with the consumer which happens to be the weaker segment in Indian markets, so that a balance in power distribution is established, corporates do not have an unfair advantage in the entire process & its not the petty consumer who is always taken for a ride. As, Charlie puts it..."yeh duniya bahut hi kutti cheez hai...aur kutton ka duniya mein ek hi jawab hai..KAMINEY".