Nana Patekar laughs off Tanushree’s harassment claim

Agencies
September 28, 2018

Mumbai, Sept 28: The debate over what is being seen as Bollywood’s #MeToo moment snowballed on Thursday as Tanushree Dutta reiterated her claim that Nana Patekar had harassed her on the sets of a film in 2008 and the veteran actor laughed off her allegation, asking what he could do about it.

A day after Dutta reopened the window on the 10-year-old incident and specifically named Patekar, there was a furious discussion on social media platforms and other media outlets but the film industry itself was mostly silent.

Patekar dismissed Dutta’s claim that he had misbehaved with her on the sets of Horn Ok Pleassss in 2008.

In a telephonic conversation with Mirror Now, the 67-year-old actor said he would see if he could take any legal step.

“What can I do about it? Tell me? How would I know?” he asked with a laugh. “What does she mean by sexual harassment? There are 50-100 people on the sets with me. Will see what I can do legally,” Patekar can be heard saying in Marathi in the audio available on the channel’s official Twitter account. Such behaviour, he added, could not have gone unnoticed in a film set with “50-100” people.

Rakesh Sarang, director of Horn Ok Pleassss, backed Patekar. “She misunderstood the enthusiasm of Mr Patekar. There were so many people on the sets. If somebody wanted to do it, why do it in front of everyone?” Sarang told PTI.

Dutta, who said she had spoken about her ordeal in 2008 as well, described Patekar’s response as a “fear and intimidation tactic.” Patekar was “repeating the mistake” that got him into trouble, she said.

“I don’t even consider him worth commenting on... Dismissing a woman’s claim, dismissing her completely. It is fear and intimidation tactic. This attitude to laugh it off, I think he will face a severe backlash. I can see through everything he is trying to do. That is sad,” the actor, who is now based in the US, told PTI.

Asked about the issue that was trending on social media and was the subject of many discussions all over, Bollywood stars Amitabh Bachchan and Aamir Khan evaded a direct answer.

Asked about the evasive reaction, Dutta said she was going to give them time and was hopeful that “people would do the right thing“.

“They are exposing themselves. This is the response of those who talk about women’s empowerment and support the #MeToo movement happening in America... and when that is happening here, this is how they respond,” she said.

She said she was coming from a compassionate space and was not going to jump to conclusions. “Some humanity will rise and they will say or do something about it. I am still hopeful that people will do the right thing,” the actor said.

When Dutta had raised the issue in 2008, Patekar had denied the claims.

Recounting the incident and its aftermath, she said she had tried to escape but the situation went from being a “harassment situation to a mob lynching situation.”

“When I tried to escape they called the media, they called some people to mob lynch and attack my car. My parents were there inside and even I was inside, it was horrific...They made sure that we did not escape from the studio, they locked the gates and then the cops came and they got us out... So when we filed the police report, they filed a counter complaint and because of the counter FIR, my dad, hair dresser and spot boy had to go through so much harassment over the next couple of years,” she recounted.

Dutta’s allegations have triggered a furious debate on sexual harassment in the Hindi film industry with many supporting her but others questioning her motives for raising the issue so many years later.

The actor, who has featured in films such as Aashiq Banaya Aapne and Chocolate: Deep Dark Secrets, said she spoke about the issue earlier and no one had the right to say anything to her.

“They called me a slut, an unprofessional.. when I spoke about it eight to ten years back. Nobody has right to say anything to me,” Dutta said.

PTI reached out to Patekar for a comment but there was no response.

Comments

Naresh
 - 
Friday, 28 Sep 2018

She was almost raped by emran hashmi in film and now talking about harassment 

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
February 14,2020

London, Feb 14: Liquor tycoon Vijay Mallya once again asked the Indian banks to take back 100 per cent of the principal amount owed to them at the end of his three-day British High Court appeal on Thursday against an extradition order to India.

The 64-year-old former Kingfisher Airlines boss, wanted in India on charges of fraud and money laundering amounting to an alleged Rs 9,000 crores in unpaid bank loans, said the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) are fighting over the same assets and not treating him reasonably in the process.

“I request the banks with folded hands, take 100 per cent of your principal back, immediately,” he said outside the Royal Courts of Justice in London.

“The Enforcement Directorate attached the assets on the complaint by the banks that I was not paying them. I have not committed any offenses under the PMLA (Prevention of Money Laundering Act) that the Enforcement Directorate should suo moto attach my assets," he said.

"I am saying, please banks take your money. The ED is saying no, we have a claim over these assets. So, the ED on the one side and the banks on the other are fighting over the same assets,” he added.

Asked about heading back to India, he noted: “I should be where my family is, where my interests are.

"If the CBI and the ED are going to be reasonable, it’s a different story. What all they are doing to me for the last four years is totally unreasonable.”

Lord Justice Stephen Irwin and Justice Elisabeth Laing, the two-member bench presiding over the appeal, concluded hearing the arguments in the case and said they will be handing down their verdict at a later date after considering the oral as well as written submissions in the “very dense” case over the next few weeks.

On a day of heated arguments between Mallya’s barrister, Clare Montgomery, and Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) counsel Mark Summers, arguing on behalf of the Indian government, both sides clashed over the prima facie case of fraud and deception against Mallya.

“We submit that he lied to get the loans, then did something with the money he wasn’t supposed to and then refused to give back the money. All this could be perceived by a jury as patently dishonest conduct,” said Summers.

“What they [Kingfisher Airlines] were saying [to the banks] about profitability going forward was knowingly wrong,” he said, as he took the High Court through evidence to counter Mallya’s lawyers’ claims that Westminster Magistrates Court Judge Emma Arbuthnot had fallen into error when she found a case to answer in the Indian courts against Mallya.

Mallya, who remains on bail on an extradition warrant, is not required to attend the hearings but has been in court to observe the proceedings since the three-day appeal opened on Tuesday. A key defence to disprove a prima facie case of fraud and misrepresentation on his part has revolved around the fact that Kingfisher Airlines was the victim of economic misfortune alongside other Indian airlines.

However, the CPS has argued that “there is enough in the 32,000 pages of overall evidence to fulfil the [extradition] treaty obligations that there is a case to answer”. “There is not just a prima facie case but overwhelming evidence of dishonesty… and given the volume and depth of evidence the District Judge [Arbuthnot] had before her, the judgment is comprehensive and detailed with the odd error but nothing that impacts the prima facie case,” said Summers.

At the start of the appeal, Mallya’s counsel claimed Arbuthnot did not look at all of the evidence because if she had, she would not have fallen into the multiple errors that permeate her judgment. The High Court must establish if the magistrates’ court had in fact fallen short on a point of law in its verdict in favour of extradition.

Representatives from the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), as well as the Indian High Commission in London, have been present in court to take notes during the course of the appeal hearing.

Mallya had received permission to appeal against his extradition order signed off by former UK home secretary Sajid Javid last February only on one ground, which challenges the Indian government's prima facie case against him of fraudulent intentions in acquiring bank loans.

At the end of a year-long extradition trial at Westminster Magistrates’ Court in London in December 2018, Judge Arbuthnot had found “clear evidence of dispersal and misapplication of the loan funds” and accepted a prima facie case of fraud and a conspiracy to launder money against Mallya, as presented by the CPS on behalf of the Indian government.

Mallya remains on bail since his arrest on an extradition warrant in April 2017 involving a bond worth 650,000 pounds and other restrictions on his travel while he contests that ruling.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
June 26,2020

Washington, Jun 26: The US is reviewing its global deployment of forces to ensure it is postured appropriately to counter the People's Liberation Army, given the increasing threat posed by China to Asian countries like India, Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Philippines, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said on Thursday.

Mr Pompeo made those remarks in response to a question during the virtual Brussels Forum 2020 of the German Marshall Fund.

"We're going to make sure we're postured appropriately to counter the PLA. We think that the challenge of our times, and we're going to make sure we have resources in place to do that," Mr Pompeo said.
 
The force posture review is being done at the direction of President Donald Trump, as part of which the US is reducing the number of its troops in Germany from about 52,000 to 25,000, he said.

Mike Pompeo said that the force posture would be dictated by the ground realities.

"In certain places there will be fewer American resources. There'll be other places - I just talked about the threat from the Chinese Communist Party, so now threats to India, threats to Vietnam, threats to Malaysia, Indonesia, South China Sea challenges, the Philippines," he said.

"To the extent that that changed, the difference in what the US decided to do impacts adversely a threat some place, it may be that other nations need to step up and take responsibility for their own defense in ways that they hadn't done previously. So, we want to do this in full consultation with all of our partners all around the world, and certainly our friends in Europe," Mr Pompeo said.

President Trump is being criticised for reducing troops from Germany. His critics say that this will increase the threat from Russia to Europe.

Mike Pompeo, however, did not agree with that argument.

It has been a long time since there has been a strategic review of our force posture all across the world. The US undertook that starting about 2.5 years ago, whether that was our forces in Africa, our forces in Asia, the force we have in the Middle East and in Europe, he said.

"We began to say these are often decisions that were made in a different time. Should we reallocate those a different way? Should we have a different composition of those forces? Everyone always wants to talk about ground troops. I get it. I was a young tank officer. You described that. There's nothing I like as much as a good M1 tank.

"But it's often the case that the capacity to deter Russia or other adversaries isn''t determined any longer by just having a bunch of folks garrisoned someplace. So, we really went to back fundamentally relook, what is the nature of the conflict, what''s the nature of the threat, and how should we allocate our resources, whether that''s our resources in the intelligence community, our resources from the Air Force or the Marines and Army," Mr Pompeo said.

Last week, Mike Pompeo criticised the Chinese Army for "escalating" the border tension with India and militarising the strategic South China Sea. He also described the ruling Communist Party of China (CPC) as a "rogue actor".

"Our broad set of allocation of security apparatus, our ability to counter cyber threats, how do we allocate them? What''s the best way to do this? And the decision that you see the president made with respect to Germany is an outcome from a collective set of decisions about how we''re going to posture our resources around the world," said the top American diplomat on Thursday.

Changes in force posture is being taken in consultations with allies and friends, Mr Pompeo said.

"President Trump has spoken to this. (Defense) Secretary (Mark) Esper will be in London today and in Brussels tomorrow. We''ll talk about our plan and how we''re thinking about delivering it," he said.

"But you should understand this, and I hope our European partners will understand this as well. When you see what we ultimately conclude, how we ultimately deliver on the statements of the president made, that they''re aimed squarely at what we believe to be democracies'' fundamental interest and certainly America's most fundamental interest," Mr Pompeo said.

Earlier this month, Mike Pompeo had said that China's actions, be it on the India border, or in Hong Kong or in the South China Sea, were part of the behaviour of the ruling Communist Party in Beijing in the recent past.

China has been fast expanding military and economic influence in the Indo-Pacific region, triggering concern in various countries of the region and beyond.

China is engaged in hotly contested territorial disputes in both the South China Sea and the East China Sea. Beijing has built up and militarised many of the islands and reefs it controls in the region. Both areas are stated to be rich in minerals, oil and other natural resources and are vital to global trade.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 12,2020

Bhopal, Mar 12: The Madhya Pradesh Congress on Thursday took a dig at Jyotiraditya Scindia, who broke ranks with the party and joined BJP on Wednesday, by pointing out that neither Prime Minister Narendra Modi nor Amit Shah had not even put out as much a tweet to welcome him in the party, and construed it as "humiliation" for the "maharaja".

"Not even a tweet by Narendra Modi-ji or Amit Shah-ji to welcome Scindia-ji! Modi-ji, Shah-ji, at least do not do it so soon. It has not even been 24 hours yet and you guys have already started humiliating him...!" Madya Pradesh Congress tweeted in Hindi.

Taking a jibe at Mr Scindia, a member of the erstwhile royal family of Gwalior who ended his 18-year-long association with the Congress party on a bitter note, the state Congress said: "He is a maharaja, the one whose history is often mentioned by Shivraj-ji (former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan)."

On Wednesday, Jyotiraditya  Scindia joined BJP in New Delhi in the presence of party president JP Nadda. He had resigned from Congress a day earlier after meeting Amit Shah and Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

Mr Scindia will file his nomination for the Rajya Sabha elections on March 13. He is expected to go to Bhopal today.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.