15
IT’S a relief of course that Aryan Khan managed to get bail in what looks like a cooked-up case of drug abuse. The 23-year-old son of Indian movie idol Shahrukh Khan was arrested from a cruise ship off Mumbai with two friends also accused of joining a rave party. No drugs were found on Aryan’s person and there’s no evidence he consumed any. It’s a murky picture for the prosecution to persist with.
Critics say the raid was part of the ham-handed script used by the right-wing government in Delhi to target pockets of resistance in the Indian film industry opposing Hindutva bigotry. They liken Aryan’s experience to a spate of recent assaults on secular-liberal filmmakers and sections of media by using drugs and revenue agencies and also federal police to harass dissenters. Comparisons have been made with the McCarthy era in the US when the media and Hollywood were hounded in the 1950s for their alleged communist links. Will Aryan see in his experience a way to link the dots that connect his 26-day ordeal in prison with the wider reality of an evolving police state?
Would he of evidently liberal and secular Hindu-Muslim parentage find the time to reflect on the big picture of religious fascism that’s beginning to define India, and the masses resisting it, led by ordinary people, farmers, workers, indigenous people, teachers, the minorities, women’s groups, a few independent journalists still courageously standing their ground, and some members of the film industry too?
Aryan should, if he steps out of his sheltered life, perhaps also persuade his father to shun his needless silence on the malaise afflicting the once-secular Indian democracy. Together, they might see that while some parts of Indian democracy are working in consonance with the constitutional promise others have struggled to stay loyal to their oath. Having been denied bail by two lower courts, Aryan must have found in the relief from the Bombay High Court an answer to his mother’s prayers in particular.
Would he find the time to reflect on the big picture of religious fascism that’s beginning to define India, and the masses resisting it?
The young man will see, however, that many others have found it difficult to find justice, which he in some measure did secure. Sometimes even the help of lawyers, leave alone a fair hearing against a hostile state, eludes the less fortunate. There is this story that might interest the Khan family of the three Kashmiri students in Agra who were booked for sedition and arrested last week after they allegedly celebrated Pakistan’s win against India in a T20 World Cup cricket. Sedition for applauding a cricket team! If Pakistan’s cricketers are to be regarded as such a malign influence on Indian cricket enthusiasts, why did the newspapers cheer the Indian skipper’s hugging the rival batsmen after their impressive victory over India?
Read more: India probes Kashmiri students for cheering Pakistan cricket win
The lawyers’ associations in Agra, reports say, had refused to defend the students in court. (Muslim lawyers in Kashmir have done it with the minorities in their patch in the past.) Eventually, a fair-minded advocate — a Brahmin to boot — did stand up for the students. And what did poor Dr Kafeel Khan do to be jailed other than securing oxygen for little babies when it was running out in the government hospital where he worked? There was this patently communal citizenship act that the right-minded people opposed, including members of the film industry. But Shahrukh Khan remained silent. This is perhaps something for Aryan to ponder. Is keeping silent a good choice or joining the growing peaceful resistance?
He might look into the case of Umar Khalid, a former student like him. Khalid called for scrupulously peaceful protests against the new citizenship law. Police accused him of starting a communal riot in Delhi. He has been in jail for more than a year. If Aryan feels wronged in the case against him, which he should, he might also consider the absurd lengths to which a biased state can go to ensnare citizens in the web of legalese.
Delhi Police filed an FIR on March 6 last year in which Umar Khalid’s speech was not mentioned. It cropped up in the charge sheet. Khalid was not present in Delhi during the rioting. The police accused him of having planned to be outside Delhi during the riots. Match that, Aryan!
Then there’s the brazen bit in the case, as reported by Hindustan Times. “Delhi Police admitted in court that it had relied on a news video broadcast by (two channels). Delhi Police had asked the TV channels to produce the complete video of the speech. But in their reply, the channels, the court was informed, maintained that the video clip they broadcast was from a tweet by BJP leader and its IT cell chief Amit Malviya. They did not have the video and their own journalists were not present on the ground to hear what Umar Khalid said.”
When the video was played, it showed Khalid appealing for the opposite of inciting violence. “Aap hamare khilaf hinsa karenge ... Hum jhande phehrayenge ... Hum hastey hastey jail jaayenge [If you act violently against us...We will unfurl the flag ...We will happily go to jail].” Aryan’s case seems similarly full of dubious challenges.
Would he be interested in following the story of the late Fr. Stan Swamy who was denied a sipping straw in jail, which he requested as he was too ill to hold a glass steadily? The 84-year-old man of God succumbed to Covid in prison. Aryan would perhaps like to be introduced to a clutch of selfless intellectuals like Sudha Bharadwaj. The 59-year-old human rights lawyer has been in pretrial detention since August 2018, when she was arrested under the draconian Unlawful Activities Prevention Act for alleged links with banned Maoist organisations, based on evidence believed to be fabricated. Aryan will see a truer world throbbing with life’s struggles and human fellowship, which beckons him and his two friends from the ship, Munmun Dhamecha and Arbaaz Merchant, to become its part.
The writer is Dawn’s correspondent in Delhi.
Published in Dawn, November 2nd, 2021
