The Case of the Missing Film
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
KISSA KURSI KA THE CASE OF THE MISSING FILM With his expected release from judicial custody in for allegedly destroying prints of a Hindi Q.N.VQHRA Delhi's Tihar Jail on feature film KKK, produced by Janata Party June 5, Sanjay Gandhi, MP, Amrit Nahata. errant son of former Although the KKK case has had its fair prime minister Indira share of high legal drama with key prosecu- Gandhi, has discovered tion witnesses turning hostile with ominous that he is not destined for regularity, public interest in the case has been political martyrdom. The virtually non-existent. initial, sporadic outbursts In fact, most people are under the of vocal protest over the Supreme Court's mistaken impression that Sanjay's alleged decision on May 5 to cancel Sanjay's bail for destruction of the KKK prints is a relatively one month in the Kixsa Kursi Ka (KKK) case minor offence. Few are aware that if convicted (in which he is the principal accused), have in the KKK case, both Sanjay and Shukla can subsided as rapidly as they surfaced. be liable to the maximum punishment of life Even the news-starved media has aban- imprisonment, (see page 25) doned him with equal promptness after Apathy: The main reason for public tersely informing the public about his eating, apathy in the KKK case is that media cover- sleeping and reading habits during his intern- age of the hearing has been largely sporadic ment as a temporary guest of the Government. and threadbare owing to the innumerable More significantly, it is also a measure of adjournments, disturbances and stalling Mrs Gandhi's new political strategy that she tactics that have dogged the KKK hearings has chosen to remain ominously silent about since its inception last March. An additional her son's dramatic detention last month. factor is that it is one of the few cases which It is poetic justice that, among all his lacks the dual attraction of the involvement alleged sins, Sanjay finds himself behind of Mrs Gandhi. V. C. Shukla, who has bars for a case that has aroused the least pub- carefully maintained a very low profile since lic interest. Sanjay, along with Indira his fall from grace, is evidently an inadequate Gandhi's former information and broad- substitute. A trunk that allegedly contained KKK prints Ironically, Nahata, the man indirectly being carried into Tis Hazari courts responsible for Sanjay's 30-day confinement in Tihar Jail, has aroused the least interest among the dramatis personae. In fact, a Sanjay arriving under heavy guard at Tis majority of Indians are not even aware of Hazari courts to testify—hopingfor martyrdom what the man looks like. Nahata himself, despite the notoriety of KKK, is an unlikely ed by Nahata's commercially-oriented deci- candidate for moviedom's Hall of Fame, sion to replace the original heroine with (see page 31). busty calendar girl Katy Mirza (see photo). An innocuous, self-styled film-maker According to Nahata, he just barely managed (KKK was his third celluloid venture), to recoup the Rs 14 lakh he claims he spent Nahata has been forcibly catapulted on producing the film. Interestingly, in a into the limelight under rather bizarre cir- letter to Shukla's successor, L. K. Advani cumstances. His original film, which was in the immediate wake of Mrs Gandhi's essentially a prophetic parody on Sanjay electoral debacle in March 1977, Nahata Gandhi, showing, in Nahata's own words, wrote that "were it (KKK) to be released "how unscrupulous politicians rape the even now, it would have broken all box dumb people of the country", turned out to office records. Looking at all these considera- be a bigger parody in real life than the re-made tions, I would be entirely within the limits of version that finally appeared on the screen reasonableness (sic) if I claim a compensation early this year. of one crore of rupees if you cannot return Paradoxically, Nahata has himself dis- my film to me". played a marked lack of scruples as far as In fact, the ill-fated odyssey of the his controversial film is concerned. When he original KKK prints, around which the originally made the film, in April 1975, entire prosecution case revolves, actually Nahata was an MP owing allegiance to the reads more like a Fellini-type political Congress Party led by Mrs Gandhi, which parody than the celluloid version of was then in power. He has since jumped onto KKK. Undoubtedly, Nahata's unfortunate the Janata bandwagon without batting the choice of KKfCs film script was either an act proverbial eyelid. of suicidal bravery or one of uninhibited Flop: Also, despite its unexpected ad- optimism. vance publicity, the re-made version of KKK Parody: When Nahata first submitted \g minister V. C. Shuklaturne, isd facinout to gb etria a daml p squib, commercially the KKK print for censorship clearance in and otherwise. The crudeness and the vague April 1975, Indira Gandhi was already flexing obscurity of the plot was in no way embellish- her dictatorial muscles and Sanjay was INDIA TODAY. JUNE 1-15. 1978 ^ Causing the destruction of the said THE CHARGES film material with intent to cause wrongful O. N. Vohra, Additional Districts & loss to the owner of the said film by setting Sessions Judge, has charged Vidya Charan ii or causing it to be set on fire. ... Shukla (accused No. 1) and Sanjay Gandhi *• Knowing or having reason to believe (Accused No. 2) with 13 separate offences. that the said material was stolen property The major charges against them are: to receiving or retaining the same. ... That you (Shukla and Sanjay) along- ^- Voluntarily concealing or disposing or with R. B. Khedkar, K. S. Yadav and making away with the said property knowing others during the period between April that the same was stolen property and 1975 to May 1977 at Bombay, Delhi and voluntarily assisting in the said act of con- Gurgaon were parties to a criminal cons- cealment or disposal or making away with piracy to commit or cause to be committed the said property. ... the following offences: Section 409 of I.P.C. ^- Criminal breach of trust in respect of Criminal breach of trust by a public the original negatives, prints and other servant, or by banker, merchant or agent. material of the Hindi feature film Kissa Whoever, being in any manner entrusted Kursi Ka produced by Shri Amrit Nahata, with property, or with any domination dominion over which was entrusted to over property in his capacity of a public- you, accused No. 1, in your capacity as a servant ... criminal breach of trust in res- public servant, being an offence punishable pect of that property shall be punishable under Section 409,1.P.C. with imprisonment for life. ... emerging from the shadows. In the words of Inevitably, there was a sharp difference of S. M. Murshid, joint secretary in the opinion within the examining committee ministry of information and broadcasting, when the film was screened for them on Nahata's film was a stringent critique of April 24, 1975. Three members recommended the politicians in power at that time, and that the film be granted a 'U' certificate subject contained thinly-veiled references to "certain to some cuts, while one member and the then personages who were then very much in acting chairman, N. S. Thapa, insisted that evidence in the upper echelons of political the film be refused a certificate on the grounds power". that it was "likely to arouse disrespect It is difficult to imagine how Nahata towards the country and incite incidence to V. C. Shukla with his defence counsel -a low expected his film to escape the censor's overthrow the Government in power". It was profile sharply-honed scissors even though the finally decided to refer the film to a revising Ministry. According to Nahata, he deposited Emergency was still two months away. committee. one positive print of his film KKK at the In KKK, the main political party had a When KKK was screened before the Mahadev Road auditorium on May 17, 1975. "people's car" as its election symbol—an seven-member revising committee on May 1, Objections: But Nahata had also seen obvious take-off on Sanjay Gandhi's dubious 1975 at Bombay's Academia Theatre, six the writing on the wall, and lost no time in Maruti car project. members approved a 'U' certificate subject attempting to foil the move. On June 12, KKK also lampooned prominent Sanjay to the deletion of certain portions. Thapa, 1975, he filed a writ petition in the Supreme supporters like Swami Dhirendra Brahma- however, who was acting chairman while the Court requesting a writ of mandamus (order chari, Indira Gandhi's private secretary incumbent chairman V. D. Vyas was away directing any public authority to perform its R. K. Dhawan, and the Emergency femme on leave, vetoed the unanimous decision official duty) directing the Central Govern- fatale Rukhsana Sultana of Turkman Gate and directed that the matter be passed on ment to certify KKK for exhibition. How- fame (played by Katy Mirza in the revised to the Central Government. Meanwhile, ever, while Nahata's petition was still version). Nahata was instructed to forward the positive hanging fire in the Supreme Court, the Infor- Seemingly undaunted, Nahata submit- print of KKK to the Film Division auditorium mation Ministry passed an order dated June ted his film to the Central Board of Film on Delhi's Mahadev Road, while the official 18, 1975, which stated that KKK was being Censors in Bombay on April 19, 1975.