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 1,2020

New Delhi, Feb 1: Activist Sharjeel Imam's mobile phone and laptop along with some anti-CAA posters have been seized from his house in Bihar's Jehanabad and rented flat in Vasant Kunj, police said on Friday.

Imam was arrested by the Delhi Police's Crime Branch from Jehanabad in a sedition case and he is being questioned by police for his alleged inflammatory speeches in Aligarh and at the Jamia Millia Islamia University here.

During investigation, a laptop and a desktop belonging to Imam were recovered from his rented flat at Vasant Kunj, Deputy Commissioner of Police (Crime) Rajesh Deo said.

His mobile phone was recovered from his house at his native place in Jehanabad's Kako area on the instance of his brother, he said.

Imam had prepared anti-CAA and anti-NRC pamphlets with "misleading and intimidating facts" and then distributed them in various mosques, the copy of which have been recovered, police said.

The shop from where he made photocopies of the pamphlets has also been identified, they added.

Imam was arrested on Tuesday. He was brought to Delhi on Wednesday and produced at the residence of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Purushottam Pathak in the evening amid tight security after which police were granted his five-day custody.

The PhD scholar at the Jawaharlal Nehru University's Centre for Historical Studies has been booked for sedition and other charges in several states after videos of his alleged inflammatory speeches, made during protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA), were circulated on the social media.

An FIR was registered against Imam by the Delhi Police on January 25 under IPC sections 124A (sedition) and 153A (promoting or attempting to promote disharmony or feelings of enmity on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste or community or any other ground whatsoever) among others.

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
January 30,2020

Mumbai, Jan 30: The Uttar Pradesh Special Task Force (STF) has arrested Dr Kafeel Khan from Mumbai airport for allegedly making inflammatory statements at AMU during protests against the Citizenship Amendments Act (CAA) last month, officials said.

Khan was arrested on Wednesday night with assistance from Mumbai Police at the airport when he arrived in the city to attend anti-CAA protests, an official said.

"Officials of the UP STF arrested Dr Kafeel Khan in a case which was registered at Civil Lines Police Station under section 153 A (promoting enmity between different groups) of IPC. Our police team helped our UP counterparts on their request," said an official from Mumbai Police.

He claimed that Khan had made inflammatory statements on December 12 last year during the protest near Bab e Syed Gate outside the Aligarh Muslim University in front of more than 600 students.

The official also alleged that the Gorakhpur doctor had made objectionable comments against Union Home Minister Amit Shah.

The FIR against Khan mentions that Swaraj India's president Yogendra Yadav was also present during the speech at AMU.

Following the arrest in the case, Khan was taken to the Sahar Police Station and after completing formalities he will be taken to UP on transit remand, the official said.

Khan, a paediatrician, had come to the limelight in 2017 when a controversy broke out after the death of over 60 children in less than a week at the BRD Medical College in Gorakhpur, UP.

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 3,2020

Chennai, Mar 3: The Madras High Court has ruled that if a working woman gives birth to a child in the second delivery after twins in the first, she is not entitled to maternity benefits as it should be treated as third child.

"As per existing rules, a woman can avail such benefits only for her first two deliveries. Even otherwise it is debatable as to whether the delivery is not a second delivery but a third one, in as much as ordinarily when twins are born they are delivered one after another, and their age and their inter-se elderly status is also determined by virtue of the gap of time between their arrivals, which amounts to two deliveries and not one simultaneous act," the court said.

The first bench, comprising Chief Justice A P Sahi and Justice Subramonium Prasad stated this while allowing the appeal from Ministry of Home Affairs.

It set aside the order June 18 2019 order of a single Judge, who extended 180 days of maternity leave and other benefits to a woman member of the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) under the rules governing the Tamil Nadu government servants.

The issue pertains to an appeal moved by the ministry, which contended that the leave claim is by a member of CISF to whom the maternity rules of Tamil Nadu would not apply.

She would be covered by the maternity benefits as provided under the Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, the ministry said.

When the appeal came up for hearing, the bench said it found that a second delivery, which, in the present case, resulted in a third child, cannot be interpreted so as to add to the mathematical precision that is defined in the rules.

The admissibility of benefits would be limited if the claimant has not more than two children, the bench said "This fact therefore changes the entire nature of the relief which is sought for by the woman petitioner, which aspect has been completely overlooked by the single judge", the bench said.

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.