- The story of an evil politician.
- Elections are soon to be held in Jan Gan, and the two main rivals are Bhikharimal and Garibdas, who are contesting under their symbols of a horse and a cycle. Then Meera and Gopal recruit a poor male, Gangaram, who assists his employer to sell fake herbs and medicines, including a birth-control pill 'Sanjay Sanjeevni', to stand for elections. Armed with a tonic-shot of Netagiri; a pill for Revolution; and a needle-shot of Socialism, Gangaram competes to be the next president with a symbol of a car. Meera then bribes the two main competitors and gets them to withdraw from the race, thus ensuring an easy win for Gangaram, who is then elected President. On his very first day, Gangaram learns that it is more practical to worship his Kursee, as well as listen to it's 8 Dictums. Then he decides to live it up during the daytime, and sleep with his busty Personal Secretary, Ruby Dixsana, at night. He then sets about to woo a dumb and naive woman, ironically named Janta (Public), and then proceeds to ignore her. He decides to eliminate hunger by first offering a reward to kill mice and rats, but when opposed by Bhajneesh, decides to ban killing any rodent. He then makes a deal with an international Caucasian male, Double Dealer, to export and import fictitious dogs and cats. When issues are not addressed, corruption increases tenfold, he decides to distract everyone's mind by declaring war on the neighboring country, Andher Nagri. After the war, he faces more opposition, and decides to declare an Emergency, arresting all opponents, curbing freedom of the media, as well as the Courts, and is all set to declare himself the permanent President of this beleaguered nation.—rAjOo (gunwanti@hotmail.com)
- With his expected release from judicial custody in Delhi's Tihar Jail on June 5, Sanjay Gandhi, errant son of former prime minister Indira Gandhi, has discovered that he is not destined for political martyrdom. The initial, sporadic outbursts of vocal protest over the Supreme Court's decision on May 5 to cancel Sanjay's bail for one month in the Kissa Kursi Ka (KKK) case (in which he is the principal accused), have subsided as rapidly as they surfaced.Even the news-starved media has abandoned him with equal promptness after tersely informing the public about his eating, sleeping and reading habits during his internment as a temporary guest of the Government. More significantly, it is also a measure of Mrs Gandhi's new political strategy that she has chosen to remain ominously silent about her son's dramatic detention last month. It is poetic justice that, among all his alleged sins, Sanjay finds himself behind bars for a case that has aroused the least public interest. Sanjay, along with Indira Gandhi's former information and broadcasting minister V.C. Shukla, is facing trial for allegedly destroying prints of a Hindi feature film KKK, produced by Janata Party MP, Amrit Nahata. Although the KKK case has had its fair share of high legal drama with key prosecution witnesses turning hostile with ominous regularity, public interest in the case has been virtually non-existent.A trunk that allegedly contained KKK prints being carried into Tis Hazari courtsIn fact, most people are under the mistaken impression that Sanjay's alleged destruction of the KKK prints is a relatively minor offence. Few are aware that if convicted in the KKK case, both Sanjay and Shukla can be liable to the maximum punishment of life imprisonment. Apathy: The main reason for public apathy in the KKK case is that media coverage of the hearing has been largely sporadic and threadbare owing to the innumerable adjournments, disturbances and stalling tactics that have dogged the KKK hearings since its inception last March. An additional factor is that it is one of the few cases which lacks the dual attraction of the involvement of Mrs Gandhi. V.C. Shukla, who has carefully maintained a very low profile since his fall from grace, is evidently an inadequate substitute. Ironically, Nahata, the man indirectly responsible for Sanjay's 30-day confinement in Tihar Jail, has aroused the least interest among the dramatis personae. In fact, a majority of Indians are not even aware of what the man looks like. Nahata himself, despite the notoriety of KKK, is an unlikely candidate for moviedom's Hall of Fame.An innocuous, self-styled film-maker (KKK was his third celluloid venture), Nahata has been forcibly catapulted into the limelight under rather bizarre circumstances. His original film, which was essentially a prophetic parody on Sanjay Gandhi, showing, in Nahata's own words, "how unscrupulous politicians rape the dumb people of the country", turned out to be a bigger parody in real life than the re-made version that finally appeared on the screen early this year.Sanjay arriving under heavy guard at Tis Hazari courts to testify - hoping for martyrdomParadoxically, Nahata has himself displayed a marked lack of scruples as far as his controversial film is concerned. When he originally made the film, in April 1975, Nahata was an MP owing allegiance to the Congress Party led by Mrs Gandhi, which was then in power. He has since jumped onto the Janata bandwagon without batting the proverbial eyelid. Flop: Also, despite its unexpected advance publicity, the re-made version of KKK turned out to be a damp squib, commercially and otherwise. The crudeness and the vague obscurity of the plot was in no way embellished by Nahata's commercially-oriented decision to replace the original heroine with busty calendar girl Katy Mirza. According to Nahata, he just barely managed to recoup the Rs 14 lakh he claims he spent on producing the film. Interestingly, in a letter to Shukla's successor, L.K. Advani in the immediate wake of Mrs Gandhi's electoral debacle in March 1977, Nahata wrote that "were it (KKK) to be released even now, it would have broken all box office records. Looking at all these considerations, I would be entirely within the limits of reasonableness (sic) if I claim a compensation of one crore of rupees if you cannot return my film to me". In fact, the ill-fated odyssey of the original KKK prints, around which the entire prosecution case revolves, actually reads more like a Fellini-type political parody than the celluloid version of KKK. Undoubtedly, Nahata's unfortunate choice of KKKs film script was either an act of suicidal bravery or one of uninhibited optimism.Left: Cans alleged to have contained KKK films being recovered from a nullah near Gurgaon. Right: The spot where the locks of the trunks containing KKK films were allegedly melted inside the Maruti factoryParody: When Nahata first submitted the KKK print for censorship clearance in April 1975, Indira Gandhi was already flexing her dictatorial muscles and Sanjay was emerging from the shadows. In the words of S.M. Murshid, joint secretary in the ministry of information and broadcasting, Nahata's film was a stringent critique of the politicians in power at that time, and contained thinly-veiled references to "certain personages who were then very much in evidence in the upper echelons of political power".It is difficult to imagine how Nahata expected his film to escape the censor's sharply-honed scissors even though the Emergency was still two months away. In KKK, the main political party had a "people's car" as its election symbol - an obvious take-off on Sanjay Gandhi's dubious Maruti car project.KKK also lampooned prominent Sanjay supporters like Swami Dhirendra Brahmachari, Indira Gandhi's private secretary R.K. Dhawan, and the Emergency femme fatale Rukhsana Sultana of Turkman Gate fame (played by Katy Mirza in the revised version).Seemingly undaunted, Nahata submitted his film to the Central Board of Film Censors in Bombay on April 19, 1975. Inevitably, there was a sharp difference of opinion within the examining committee when the film was screened for them on April 24, 1975. Three members recommended that the film be granted a 'U' certificate subject to some cuts, while one member and the then acting chairman, N.S. Thapa, insisted that the film be refused a certificate on the grounds that it was "likely to arouse disrespect towards the country and incite incidence to overthrow the Government in power". It was finally decided to refer the film to a revising committee. V.C. Shukla with his defence counsel - a low profileWhen KKK was screened before the seven-member revising committee on May 1, 1975 at Bombay's Academia Theatre, six members approved a 'U' certificate subject to the deletion of certain portions. Thapa, however, who was acting chairman while the incumbent chairman V.D. Vyas was away on leave, vetoed the unanimous decision and directed that the matter be passed on to the Central Government. Meanwhile, Nahata was instructed to forward the positive print of KKK to the Film Division auditorium on Delhi's Mahadev Road, while the official KKK file was dispatched to the Information Ministry. According to Nahata, he deposited one positive print of his film KKK at the Mahadev Road auditorium on May 17, 1975. Objections: But Nahata had also seen the writing on the wall, and lost no time in attempting to foil the move. On June 12, 1975, he filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court requesting a writ of mandamus (order directing any public authority to perform its official duty) directing the Central Government to certify KKK for exhibition. However, while Nahata's petition was still hanging fire in the Supreme Court, the Information Ministry passed an order dated June 18, 1975, which stated that KKK was being examined by the Government and the case would be dealt with under the requisite provisions of the Cinematograph Act. The ministry added salt to the wound by handing Nahata a show cause notice issued by Joint Secretary Murshid, which listed a total of 51 separate objections to his film. Nahata's subsequent claim that the objections were "frivolous" and "absurd" seems largely justified, considering the nature of some of the objections. For instance, Objection 2 states that "all portions of shots and sequence wherever the president or members of his council are shown wearing caps in Gandhian style being white, blue and yellow". Objection 9 was to a line in the dialogue which merely states that "I propose the only male member of this club, Miss Meera Devi, M. A. Politics, be put up as a Presidential candidate": Similarly, another objection was to the line; "Where is poverty in Jan Gan Desh? There are only poor." Prosecution counsel Jethmalani visiting the Maruto factoryHowever, the Information Ministry, in its infinite wisdom, felt that these portions would "ferment social unrest or discontent to such an extent as to incite people to crime and will promote disorder, violence, a breach of law or disaffection or resistance to the Government". Three days after the show cause notice was issued, Mrs Gandhi decided to clamp down the Emergency, and shortly after, V.C. Shukla took over as information minister.Heavy Odds: Despite the odds piling up against him, Nahata was still determined to salvage his film. On July 11, 1975 he submitted a written reply to the 51 objections in which, contrary to his later claims, he stated that the characters in KKK were "imaginary and do not refer to any political party or persons".However, the fate of KKK had already been sealed at an alleged secret coordination committee meeting held on July 7, 1975 chaired by V.C. Shukla. The prosecution has alleged that during the meeting, Shukla had ordered that the film, including the original negatives, be seized.While this is still to be proved, it is significant that on the same day Nahata handed in his written reply (July 11). Joint Secretary Murshid had already passed an order stating that "the film Kissa Kursi Ka should not be given a certificate for public exhibition on the grounds that it is against the interest and security of the state ...". Murshid followed this up with another order dated July 14, which states that "in exercise of the power conferred by sub-rule (I) of Rule 51 of the said Rules, the Central Government hereby declare the film Kissa Kursi Ka to be forfeited to the Central Government".Government Property: On July 17, 1975, Nahata made a last-ditch attempt to rescue his film and re-applied to the Supreme Court asking for a stay of the seizure order. While the Supreme Court rejected Nahata's appeal, it also directed the Government to preserve the film material of KKK, negatives as well as the prints lying in the Bombay Film Laboratory, and deposit them with the Censor Board. With the film now officially the property of the Government, Nahata's role in the affair became a relatively minor one, while the brief but dramatic fight of the KKK phoenix entered its last mystery-shrouded lap. Chief Justice Chandrachud - dramtic judgementOn August 1, 1975 the Theatre Branch of the Bombay police seized all the KKK film material consisting of 5 steel trunks and 241 reels of film, including stills from the film, and handed the lot over to the Censor Board Office. However, the event that triggered off the mysterious disappearance of the KKK prints was Nahata's writ petition that came up before the Supreme Court on October 29, 1975. In its judgement, the Supreme Court ordered that the film be screened for the judges on November 17, 1975 at New Delhi.The order was passed on to the Information Ministry, who confirmed that the film would be screened on the day in question at the Mahadev Road auditorium. Nahata, grabbing desperately at straws, took additional precautions by booking the auditorium in his name for November 17, and also handed over advance payment for the hire.Hostile Witnesses: From this point onwards, the macabre sequence of events has been largely obscured by the conflicting evidence given by a number of key prosecution witnesses in the KKK case (all former employees of Sanjay's Maruti factory) who have inexplicably turned hostile.So far, out of the 26 prosecution witnesses examined, no less than ten have turned "hostile" in the witness box, while a similar number have been "given up" by prosecution lawyers because they had been allegedly "won over".While the sudden spate of hostile witnesses has caused undoubtable damage to the prosecution's case, it is also the reason why Sanjay finds himself languishing in Tihar Jail. In fact, the Supreme Court's 25-page judgement cancelling Sanjay's bail handed down by Chief Justice Y.V. Chandrachud clearly stated that there "was satisfactory proof that the respondent (Sanjay) has abused his liberty by attempting to suborn the prosecution witnesses. He has therefore forfeited his right to be free". The judgement then went on to list "outstanding instances" of attempts to suborn key prosecution witnesses.The entire prosecution case so far largely hinges on the evidence of R. B. Khedkar, one of the two approvers in the KKK case.Khedkar, a former security officer in Maruti, has testified that prints of KKK were burnt by him in the Maruti factory premises at Sanjay Gandhi's orders in late November 1975. According to his statement, the destruction of the film took place on two successive nights.He deposed that the film material was removed from the original trunks and burnt in a pit. He also stated that the film cans were stamped with the name of the laboratory alongside the title, Kissa Kursi Ka.Dramatic: In fact, the KKK hearings, in spite of its lack of public interest, has proved no less dramatic than the events that precipitated the case. Despite the unusual number of key witnesses turning hostile, the entire proceedings so far have been dominated by the Thespian-like figure of Ram Jethmalani the prosecution counsel for the state and one of the country's best-known legal luminaries. K.P. Sreedharan - prosecution witnessJethmalani, a plumpish, silver-haired man with deceptively innocent looks, is a commanding figure in court, with his dramatic gestures and the vocal cords of a stage actor. According to the prosecution case, the disappearance of the KKK prints had been instigated by Shukla, who had allegedly issued instructions on November 6 (10 days before the proposed screening of KKK for Supreme Court judges) that all the negative and positive prints of KKK lying in New Delhi and Bombay should be "secretly collected" and placed under his personal custody.K.P. Sreedharan, a prosecution witness has testified that the KKK prints were collected "in the first week of November" from the Mahadev Road auditorium by S. Ghosh, then deputy secretary in the Information Ministry. Sreedharan was at that time in charge of the Films Division auditorium. Another prosecution witness, M.I. Sethi, Bombay unit manager of the Films Division, has testified that he had brought the KKK prints from Bombay as "a secret Government document" in 13 steel trunks on November 9, 1975, by the Western Express. Stills from the remade version of KKK - (left) the Kursi that caused the controversy, and (right) Katy Mirza in a provocative poseSethi deposed that he was accompanied on the journey by M.N. Kane, another official in the Films Division. Sethi testified that Deputy Secretary Ghosh took delivery of the 13 trunks at New Delhi railway station on November 10. In short, what the prosecution counsels are essentially trying to prove is: Nahata deposited one positive print of KKK in the Films Division auditorium at Mahadev Road on 17.5.75 according to the order passed by the Information Ministry. The entire film material was packed in 13 steel trunks and brought to New Delhi railway station on November 10, 1975, by Kane and Sethi following instructions from senior officials in the Information Ministry. That these instructions emanated from V.C. Shukla. That the positive print in the Mahadev Road auditorium was collected by Deputy Secretary Ghosh on November 6, 1975, in his personal car, from where it was allegedly transferred to V.C. Shukla's staff car and driven to 1, Safdarjung road. The entire film material which arrived in New Delhi from Bombay on November 10 was received at the station by Ghosh and Shukla's special assistant, V. S. Tripathi, and allegedly loaded on two tempo vans belonging to Maruti. That the tempos were driven by two Maruti drivers, Charan Singh and Ram Chander (both of whom have turned hostile), to the former prime minister's house and thereafter to the Maruti factory at Gurgaon. The film material was unloaded and stored on the premises of Maruti. A few days later, allegedly under Sanjay's orders, security officer Khedkar (one of the two approvers) burnt all the film material along with assistant security officer Yadav and watchman Om Prakash, on two successive nights. Supreme Court was told repeatedly that the film was not traceable, and eventually on March 26, Deputy Secretary Ghosh filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court stating that the film KKK had been "mixed up" with other films. After the March general election, Sanjay allegedly ordered the 13 trunks collected and had them destroyed. That Sanjay also allegedly destroyed all records in connection with the storage of the 13 steel trunks. That in spite of the destruction of the material, one trunk lid, one lock, one RCIA - showing 13 galvanized iron trunks and a stock register showing 13 trunks, one intact film can and 3 cm of burnt film were recovered from the Maruti factory premises. Struggle: The official KKK files of the Information Ministry highlight the ministry's 'struggle' to meet the Supreme Court's demands. A week before the screening date fixed by the Supreme Court (November 17,1975), the Information Ministry informed the Supreme Court that "the print is not readily available and efforts are being made to trace it."Accordingly, the Supreme Court extended the screening date to December 12, 1975. Two days before the proposed screening, on December 10, the Information Ministry again informed the Court that the film had not yet been traced.On December 11. the Additional Solicitor General, V.P. Raman, wrote a personal letter to V.C. Shukla, stating that "the Court would take a very serious view if the film is not produced for being screened, as directed by it."Shukla did not bother to reply himself. instead Ghosh replied on December 17, 1975 again parroting the refrain that the film could not be traced though "all possible efforts were being made". It is significant that the Information Ministry files show no trace of such "efforts" having being made.On December 19, 1975 Raman again wrote a personal letter to Shukla insisting that the film be produced for screening on January 22, 1976. The letter also stated that if the positive print was not available, a print should be made from the negatives.Ghosh again replied to Raman's letter on January 21, 1976 once again stating that the film was still untraceable. Raman wrote back to Shukla on January 23, 1976 stating that the Court, "as a final chance," adjourned the screening to March 1, 1976. On March 26, Deputy Secretary Ghosh filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court stating that the film could not be traced. Finally, Nahata himself put an end to the matter by suddenly withdrawing his petition from the Supreme Court on July 30. 1976. According to Nahata, he took this inexplicable step after Shukla threatened him with "dire consequences" if he did not withdraw his petition. While this sequence of events is still to be proved (Shukla and three senior officials of the Information Ministry are also facing contempt of court charges filed against them by the Advocate General in the Supreme Court), some of the contradictory statements given by the hostile witnesses so far, are equally revealing. For instance, Ram Chander, one of the Maruti drivers who allegedly transported the KKK prints to Maruti factory, made some interesting statements under cross examination by prosecution counsel. Q. Where are you employed these days? A. With Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Fund.Q. Are you concerned with Maruti Technical Services? A. No.Q. Is Sanjay Gandhi or Indira Gandhi in any manner concerned with Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial? A. She is the chairman and I am working as a driver under her. Q. Since when have you been a driver under her? A. Since February 1978. Q. You continue to be a driver of Indira Gandhi to this date? A. Yes. Stalling: There have been a host of similar contradictions regarding testimonies about the entries made in the Maruti registers regarding 13 steel trunks, and in the store's registers of Maruti.So far, however, Sanjay Gandhi's defence counsel, headed by Kundan Lal Arora, an aggressive but taciturn man, have been content with employing the usual stalling tactics, like challenging the appointment of the prosecution counsels and raising objections at almost every stage of the proceedings."Naturally he has the right to employ every method at his disposal," shrugged Jethmalani, seemingly unconcerned over the unexpected twists and turns the KKK case has been taking. Arora, however, was less expansive. "My lips are sealed. I refuse to discuss the case," was his terse comment to India Today.Meanwhile, the KKK hearings are fated to slide into further obscurity a la the Shah Commission unless something really dramatic takes place. Arora estimates the KKK case will probably drag on for at least another year, if not more, while Jethmalani is hoping the case will wind up by August.Jethmalani's premise is that "the accused are banking on a change in the political climate", a possibility that, at the present moment does not seem all that remote. However, what most observers are waiting to see is whether Sanjay's month-long confinement will have cured him of his habitual arrogance and his oft-displayed contempt for the law. THE CHARGES O.N. Vohra, Additional Districts and Sessions Judge, has charged Vidya Charan Shukla (accused No. 1) and Sanjay Gandhi (Accused No. 2) with 13 separate offences. The major charges against them are:That you (Shukla and Sanjay) along-with R.B. Khedkar, K.S. Yadav and others during the period between April 1975 to May 1977 at Bombay, Delhi and Gurgaon were parties to a criminal conspiracy to commit or cause to be committed the following offences: Criminal breach of trust in respect of the original negatives, prints and other material of the Hindi feature film Kissa Kursi Ka produced by Shri Amrit Nahata, dominion over which was entrusted to you, accused No. 1, in your capacity as a public servant, being an offence punishable under Section 409, I.P.C.Causing the destruction of the said film material with intent to cause wrongful loss to the owner of the said film by setting or causing it to be set on fire. ...Knowing or having reason to believe that the said material was stolen property to receiving or retaining the same. ...Voluntarily concealing or disposing or making away with the said property knowing that the same was stolen property and voluntarily assisting in the said act of concealment or disposal or making away with the said property. .—ABC123@hotmail.com
- Presidential elections are soon to be held in Jan Gan, and the two main political parties are headed by Bhikharimal and Garibdas, who are contesting under their respective symbols of a cycle and horse.
A foreign educated female, Meera, and her boyfriend, Gopal, decide to field their very own candidate. They chose a poor male, Gangaram, who is employed on a meager wage of Two Rupees a day with his employer, who sells fake herbs and medicines, including one called 'Sanjay Sanjeevni'.
The duo then bribe the two main contestants in order to force them to withdraw their names from the election, thus ensuring an easy win for Gangaram, who goes on to become the President-elect, after successfully wooing a naive and dumb poor woman named Janta (Public).
On his very first day, Gangaram learns from his Kursee (Chair) that it is more practical for him to obey it's 8 commands, and he does so quite religiously.
His Presidential Assistant, Deshpal, recruits a busty Private Secretary, Ruby Dixsana, for Gangaram's nightly pleasure.
On the issue of poverty, he decides that mice and rats eat food grains, and are, therefore responsible for this problem, so he instructs the Government to pay a reward of Ten Rupees for every dead mouse.
Corrupt Government employees instead accept a One Rupee bribe in lieu of a dead mouse, and pay huge sums to the public.
When Janta kills five mice, she becomes the only one to present physical evidence, and is ridiculed and given the runaround by officials. When she approaches Gangaram, he refuses to discuss this issue with her.
When Bhajneesh launches a protest over the alleged killing of mice, as they are linked to Bhagwan Shri Ganesh, Gangaram meets with him, presents him with a solid gold 400 kilo mouse, and assures him that the rodents will not be killed, and those caught killing them will be arrested.
Unaware of the changed circumstances, and still demanding compensation, Janta is arrested by the Police for killing five mice.
Gangaram then makes a deal with a Caucasian male named Double Dealer - which involves fictitious export and import of dogs and cats.
When pressure mounts on him to address issues such as removal of poverty, he enlists the assistance of Bhajneesh, who, for a huge fee, recruits several hundred employees to destroy shanty huts, and build multi-storeyed buildings.
When corruption increases tenfold, and pressure mounts on him again, Gangaram decides to blame everything on external forces, especially Jan Gan's neighboring country, Andher Nagri.
He visits it's emperor, and after some discussions, both verbally agree that in order to distract their respective electorate, it would be in both their interests to wage war on each other.
In this way, both countries go to war.
When Gopal protests and conspires to overthrow Gangaram, Deshpal kills him, and calls it a suicide. But not before Gopal finds out that no one in Parliament really wants to address burning issues as poverty, hunger, housing, employment, and corruption.
Bhikharimal then approaches the Courts to declare Gangaram's election null and void.
As soon as the Court issues the verdict against him, Gangaram declares an Emergency, has all opposition members arrested, and curbs the freedom of the media and the Courts.
When Meera opposes him, he kills her, and is now all set to declare himself the permanent President of this beleaguered nation.
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content
More from this title
More to explore
Most anticipated Indian movies and shows
Percentage shows amount of top page views.