The premature release from prison of gangster-politician Anand Mohan Singh, convicted of killing Dalit IAS officer G Krishnaiah in 1994, may prove to be an electoral boost or backfire spectacularly for the Nitish Kumar-led government in Bihar. The release, significantly timed a year ahead of the 2024 Lok Sabha election, may earn Nitish the support of Rajput voters as Mohan is an influential member of the caste. Rajputs form 9 per cent of the electorate in Bihar but wield considerable clout in influencing voting patterns of other castes too. However, in recent years the Rajput vote has largely gone to the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance in Bihar. Whether the release of Singh will persuade them to change course, and vote for the JDU-RJD combine remains to be seen. Singh himself and his wife and son are affiliated to the RJD. What is amply clear is the complex nature of Bihar’s caste politics and its twists and turns that the state’s politicians navigate so deftly. When Krishnaiah, the then district magistrate of Gopalganj, was killed by a mob that reportedly included Anand Mohan, Lalu Prasad was in power in the state. He was held guilty and swiftly arrested. When the court finally convicted him of the crime in 2007 Nitish Kumar was the chief minister. Singh’s initial death sentence was commuted to life but a change in prison rules brought about by the Bihar government in April this year entitled even those convicted of killing a government servant on duty to premature release on the grounds of “good behaviour”. Anand Mohan walked free on April 27, much to the dismay of the widow and daughter of the slain IAS officer, who have challenged his release in the Supreme Court.
Nitish Kumar has drawn flak for his alleged anti-Dalit stance, but Bihar’s politicians of all hues have refrained from directly targeting Anand Mohan, given the Rajput vote bank. The Bihar CM appears confident of riding out any Dalit anger against Singh’s release but are electoral compulsions the only reason for such important administrative decisions? Nitish Kumar, who has been touted as the model of good governance, surely cannot be condoned for such an ethically compromised decision. Opposition parties’ outrage over the amnesty accorded to Bilkis Bano’s rapists and the killers of her infant daughter by the Gujarat government appears to be misplaced given their silence on the Anand Mohan issue. What about all the posturing on Dalit empowerment and fighting for the underprivileged? Actions never seem to match words in the world of politics. The hypocrisy surrounding pronouncements by ‘netas’ can turn even believers into cynics. It is time for a complete overhaul of the system.
Art or propaganda?
Days ahead of the release of the film, The Kerala story, that seeks to ‘unearth’ the events that led to ‘approximately 32,000 women going missing’ in the southern state, Left and Congress leaders have hit out against the filmmaker and producer for propagating falsehoods and trying to spread communal disharmony in a state known for its secular credentials. The film supposedly follows a group of women from the state who converted to Islam and joined the ranks of ISIS to wage war against the Indian state. The film’s claim that 32,000 women from Kerala have gone missing and have allegedly been converted to Islam appears far-fetched and a distortion of facts. Peddling the ‘love jihad’ theory and showing Hindu and Christian women to be easily lured by Muslim men is part of the Sangh Parivar agenda but that it is gathering resonance in a supposedly secular state like Kerala is disturbing to say the least. Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan has said the film is a product of the Sangh Parivar lie factory made with the aim of demeaning the state and portraying it as the epicentre of religious terrorism. The leader of the Opposition in the Kerala Assembly V D Satheeshan has urged the state government not to allow the film to be screened in Kerala. Thiruvananthapuram MP Shashi Tharoor has also slammed the film.
Artistic licence is the cornerstone of cinema but does blatant falsehood come under its purview? When the highest court of the land has rubbished the love jihad theory, can it continue to be milked for commercial success? In-your-face propaganda may appeal to a certain section of the cinema-viewing public, the response to The Kashmir Files being an example, but it is ethically questionable and morally reprehensible.
