Belagavi district magistrate court has permitted the Belagavi police to reopen investigations into the petrol bomb attack on Prakash Theatre that was screening Bollywood film Padmaavat. According to The Indian Express report, the move follows the ongoing investigations by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) into the murder of journalist Gauri Lankesh.

The SIT investigations had revealed a conspiracy by a radical Hindu group to kill the rationalists and “anti-Hindutva” activists, and the same investigation has also uncovered that the same group was behind all the attacks on theatre screenings of the movie Padmaavat in Maharashtra and Karnataka.

On January 25, 2018, two unidentified persons had hurled two petrol bombs at the theatre, causing panic and cancellation of the shows. The Indian Express has reported that Amol Kale, the main accused in the Gauri Lankesh case, had also engineered the plan to attack theatres. Kale is former convenor of the Hindu terrorist outfit Sanatan Sanstha (SS). The SIT had recovered a diary from Kale which had uncovered a conspiracy to kill various rationalists and plans to attack theatres. According to this report, Kale had noted, “Throw stones at the entrance. Use petrol bomb on the vehicles. Use crackers and rods at the ticket counter. Make fake calls, and throw pamphlet. Theatre audience and producer will have loss,’’ ahead of the attacks.

Sharad Kalaskar and Sudhanva Gondhalekar were earlier arrested by the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) for allegedly hoarding explosives and plotting terrorism activities. They also are linked to the murder of Narendra Dabholkar and Lankesh. Kalaskar is a member of SS, while Gondhalekar is a member of SS as well as of Shivpratishthan Hindustan. The ATS had told the Pune sessions court that the information decoded from Kalaskar’s computer brought to the light the fact that they were planning to bomb the venue of the Sunburn Festival in Pune and screenings of movie Padmavat at cinema houses in Belgaum and in Kalyan, reported allaboutbelgaum.com.

Sanatan Sanstha and Bombs
For the SS, bombs, explosives and other weapons are a necessity to establish what they call a Hindu Rashtra (Hindu nation). It is a necessity because one of the ways according to Jayant Balaji Athavale – founder of the SS – to establish Hindu Rashtra, one has to kill those who oppose the Hindu Rashtra project. This is not the first time that the SS or its associates are named in violent attacks in the name of Hindutva.

The activists of the SS have been arrested in several bomb blast cases in the past. The organisation was also accused, and two of its supporters were given 10-year imprisonment for bomb blasts in the Gadkari Rangayatan auditorium in Thane on June 4, 2008. This was apparently done to protest against a Marathi play, Amhi Pachpute, which they had claimed, showed Hindu gods in a poor light. Those who were arrested are currently out on the bail.

The Goa police arrested six SS members involved in a bomb blast in Madgaon, Goa, in October 2009. According to the police, two SS supporters, Malgonda Patil and Yogesh Naik, were allegedly carrying a bomb in their scooter, to plant it near the Narkasur effigy competition in Madgaon. The duo died as the bomb went off prematurely.

The National Investigation Agency (NIA), which had taken over the investigations, has alleged that an SS member, who was an engineering student, played a key role in preparing the improvised explosive devices (IED) and carrying detonators and timer devices for the blast. However, all six were acquitted, and some of the SS members still remain absconding. All of these attacks were in the name of “protecting” the Hindu religion.

Courtesy: Indian Cultural Forum
 

The post Accused in Lankesh Murder Case Also ‘Planned’ to Bomb Padmaavat Screenings appeared first on SabrangIndia.

 
EPA-EFE/Divyakant Solanki

Padmaavat tells the story of Padmavati, a 14th-century Hindu queen belonging to the Rajput caste and the Muslim ruler Alauddin Khilji. Such was the fury unleashed by the release of the film in January that some states banned its screening until the Supreme Court ruled that the bans were unconstitutional as they denied free speech.

Padmaavat is merely the latest of a string of films released in India over the past few years that have provoked unrest. What these films have had in common is their strong female characters. For example, Fire, directed by Deepa Mehta in 1996, depicted the provocative homosexual relationship between two women and angered the (mainly female) supporters of far-right political party Shiv Sena. Protesters stormed cinema theatres in Mumbai, burned posters and shouted angry slogans.

Lipstick Under My Burkha was also initially banned in 2017. The film, directed by Alankrita Shrivastava, portrays the intimate lives of four women. India’s Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) ruled that there was too much “abusive language” and “audio pornography” which might offend Indian Muslims. “The story is lady-oriented, their fantasy above life,” said a letter from the board of censors to the film’s producers. The decision was subsequently overturned on appeal.

Historically in Bollywood films, women have represented ideas of acceptability, motherhood and – in a complex way – nationhood to the audience. In doing so, they have been carriers of messages revolving around traditions and honour, which had not only to pass muster with the rigorous CBFC but also – and perhaps more importantly – be acceptable to the various religious and political communities.
 

Stuff of legend

The story of Padmaavat goes back to a ballad by the Sufi composer Malik Muhammad Jayasi in 1590 – which is when the figure of Padmavati seems to have emerged (although whether or not she really lived or is a character of folkore remains uncertain). It is a fascinating story, which has been adapted by several authors who have reinterpreted the Persian script and stitched elements of pride, honour and, territorial and cultural belongingness on to Padmavati’s character.

Padmavati (unknown artist, 1765). Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris

A simplified version of the story goes like this: Padmavati, a princess of unsurpassed beauty and virtue, is said to have committed “jauhar” – ritual self-immolation – rather than submit to the advances of the sultan, Allaudin Khilji, a Muslim. Allaudin had besieged Chittorgarh and killed her husband, the Rajput king, Maharawal Ratan Singh.

But Padmavati’s story has multiple, conflicting versions – often preserved by oral transmission and multiple traditions. The fictionalisation of Padmaavat has raised controversy and indignation among political and religious groups who have criticised and heavily condemned both the amorous story between a Muslim sultan and a Hindu queen (albeit the tension in those times was more about territorial dominance than religion) and damaged Rajput pride.
 

Passing judgement

The CBFC delayed the release of the film reportedly on the grounds of an incomplete application form submitted by the filmmakers. The board also questioned whether the film was fictional or based on historical facts. However, while the CBFC, as official censor, plays the role of passing judgement on the content of a film and how it is presented, much of Padmaavat’s controversy – like some of its predecessors – is about how it is viewed by various different sections of Indian society.
 

There are several points that can be made about the way these protests have unfolded – at the core of them, a secular tension between tradition and modernity. The first is about censorship in India. The CBFC is notoriously hard to please. But more important than the CBFC is another (unofficial) censor – the Indian public themselves. And what makes the public so hard to please is that pretty much any traditional story will offend one section of society while boosting the political self-confidence of another. And, as we have seen, these protests have a tendency to be pretty strident.

And with Padmavaat we are not dealing with a straightforward historical epic, but a story which means different things to all the different groups. So while we don’t even know whether Padmavati actually existed, this account of her life – as stirring and beautiful as Bhansali has brought it to life on screen – is still churning up deep and violent passions. One thing’s for certain: it’s not easy being a film director in India.

Monia Acciari, Lecturer in Cinema and Television History, De Montfort University

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

The post Bollywood epic Padmavaat has emerged out of the mists of legend to divide Indian society appeared first on SabrangIndia.