Latest news with #SankaranNair
Indian Express
a day ago
- Entertainment
- Indian Express
Kesari 2 isn't an ‘untold story', it's historical fiction that minimises Sankaran Nair's real-life contributions to the freedom struggle
Kesari Chapter 2, the film starring Akshay Kumar, directed by Karan Singh Tyagi, which released in theatres just a couple of months ago, centered its promotions on this being the 'untold story' of Jallianwala Bagh that had stayed hidden for over 100 years. The makers declared that the film was based on the events that happened after the massacre at Jallianwala Bagh, where thousands of innocent Indians died after Hitler-like General Reginald Dyer ordered his troops to fire at them without any warning. The events at Jallianwala Bagh were undeniably brutal and over 100 years later, Britain is yet to apologise for them. Kesari Chapter 2 reminds the audience that this apology is due but it does something else as well, it tries to rewrite the story of Sankaran Nair and in the process, it diminishes his actual contribution to the Indian freedom struggle. Nair was a hero, and he did fight against the British but there was never a case against General Dyer in any court in Amritsar. Kesari Chapter 2 claims to be the 'untold story of Jallianwala Bagh' but the fact is, that this courtroom battle never took place. Kesari Chapter 2 claims to be based on the book written by Sankaran Nair's third generation, Raghu Palat and Pushpa Palat, titled 'The Case That Shook the Empire' but upon examining this book, and the autobiography of Nair, it is evident that the acclaimed barrister was never in a trial against General Dyer but Kesari Chapter 2 tries to rewrite history as its actors and director go around claiming that history books aren't doing a good enough job. The disclaimer that Kesari 2 is essentially a work of fiction doesn't go far enough given the publicity material has tagged the film as 'the untold story'. Sankaran Nair was a member of the Viceroy's Council, and saw himself as an ally to the then-Viceroy of India, Lord Chelmsford. But soon after the massacre at Jallianwala Bagh, which was not appropriately reported by the press because of the severe press censorship implemented in Amritsar, Nair was shocked to find out the barbaric acts carried out by Dyer and his men. 'If to govern the country, it is necessary that innocent persons should be slaughtered at Jallianwala Bagh and that any Civilian Officer may, at any time, call in the military and the two together may butcher the people as at Jallianwala Bagh, the country is not worth living in,' he wrote in his autobiography. ALSO READ | Kesari Chapter 2: Akshay Kumar's courtroom drama accidentally exposes Bollywood's handling of sexual misconduct Nair expected Lord Chelmsford to criticise this episode but when he saw that no one in the British administration was willing to speak against the brutal massacre, he resigned from his position in the Viceroy's Council. His resignation shocked the British administration as prior to this, they saw Nair as a loyal ally. After his resignation, Lieutenant Governor of Punjab, Michael O'Dwyer, immediately revoked orders for press censorship in the state and martial law was called off. It was Nair's resignation that led to the formation of the Hunter Commission, which looked into the barbaric acts at the Jallianwala Bagh. The Hunter Commission was a seven-member committee composed of four British and three Indians that conducted interviews all over India, met with eyewitnesses of the massacre and also interviewed General Dyer. As per The Case That Shook the Empire, Dyer accepted that he 'planned the shooting at Jallianwala Bagh in advance' and he had no intentions of scattering the crowd because they were violating the curfew. 'More damning was his admission that he would have used machine guns and armoured cars if it had been possible,' it read. Dyer also confessed that he made the conscious choice to leave the wounded to die. This was the only time when Dyer was made to appear in front of a body that was investigating the massacre, and here, he shamelessly admitted his dastardly acts. Kesari Chapter 2 would have you believe that Dyer was made to stand in court while a former ally to the crown, Nair, badgered him with questions, but this never happened. Hunter Commission submitted its findings and declared that Dyer's actions were a 'grave error.' The crown did not wish to punish Dyer as it was seen that he had 'averted another mutiny' and so, he wasn't court-martialled or dismissed. But, they could not have him in India due to the growing resistance against him, and so, he was shipped off to England in April 1920. ALSO READ | Even as Akshay Kumar's Kesari Chapter 2 shows an imagined past, it ends up confronting the present While Reginald Dyer was the man on ground in Jallianwala Bagh, his superior was Michael O'Dwyer, who was the Lieutenant Governor of Punjab at the time. It was O'Dwyer who gave Dyer enough power that he could implement whatever laws he saw fit. At one point, Dyer ordered people to crawl through the streets of Amritsar, and he was empowered to do so by O'Dwyer. The events at Jallianwala Bagh shocked those Indians who, until then, enjoyed British aristocracy and had received knighthood from them. Rabindranth Tagore gave up his knighthood and Nair left his job with the crown and started working as the Diwan of Indore, which was a princely state then. It was here, in 1922, that he wrote a book titled Gandhi and Anarchy. Nair 'did not believe that non-violence, non-cooperation and civil disobedience was the way for India to achieve Home Rule' and he expressed the same in his book. Here, Nair also implied that Michael O'Dwyer was just as responsible as Reginald Dyer for the massacre in Punjab. 'Nair implied the Punjab atrocities were committed with O'Dwyer's full knowledge and approval,' the book read. When O'Dwyer got his hands on this book in England, he decided to sue Nair for defamation, as he had claimed innocence for the atrocities in Punjab. Sardar Udham Singh eventually assassinated Michael O'Dwyer in 1940. But in Kesari Chapter 2, O'Dwyer is reduced to a supporting character who can be seen making backroom deals but is nowhere on Nair's radar. ALSO READ | FIR lodged against film Kesari Chapter 2 for 'distorting historical facts' after police complaint in Bengal The real-life case was no less than a movie, even though the filmmakers chose not to make a movie on this. O'Dwyer claimed innocence and was 'offended' with Nair's accusations. He demanded that Nair withdraw his book, offer him an apology and damages worth £1,000. Nair, obviously, refused to bow down and was ready to go to trial. He weighed his pros and cons before making this decision. The biggest pro here was that the trial would be held in London, and the press would be covering it. With this, Nair had the opportunity of talking about the massacre at Jallianwala Bagh in front of the English press, and this was the only way the higher-ups in the British government and the locals of the country would get to know how Britain was treating its subjects in India. But, there were some major cons as well. The trial would be presided by an English judge and the judgment would be made by an English jury, and chances were, that they would support O'Dwyer because he was one of them. Nair also did not have the opportunity of presenting his witnesses in person, and would only get a chance to read out their testimony, that could be misinterpreted by foreigners. All of his disadvantages would be advantageous for O'Dwyer but he decided to fight this battle anyway. Even though the trial was was held in England, Dyer did not attend a day in court on account of his ill health so Nair never really confronted him in any court, which is the base of Kesari Chapter 2. ALSO READ | Dharma's creative head responds to Kesari 2 director's comments on film blending fact, fiction: 'Masterclass for Philistines' Nair went through many troubles while preparing for this trial. The first barrister he hired to represent him was promoted to Attorney General, so he quit. The second barrister he hired quit just a day prior. And so, in desperate times, he had to hire Sir Walter Schwabe, a former Chief Justice of the Madras High Court. Schwabe was a learned man but wasn't a trial lawyer, and thus, wasn't cut out for such court battles. In the book written by his grandson, it is questioned why Nair didn't represent himself, but there is no explanation provided for the same. 'It is unclear as to why Nair did not choose to defend himself when Simon withdrew. He would have certainly acquitted himself better than Schwabe who was not as experienced, strong or as knowledgeable about the case,' it read. Nair vs O'Dwyer began in April 30, 1924, almost five years after Jallianwala Bagh massacre and the case went on for nearly five and a half weeks, presided by Justice Henry McCardie. Nair's case was about O'Dwyer being aware of Dyer's actions in Amritsar but after the opening remarks, McCardie, who had blind faith in the British Empire and considered himself to be superior, turned it into an evaluation of Dyer's actions, as he repeatedly insisted that Dyer had to shoot at people to avoid a mutiny. The case was no longer about O'Dwyer's involvement but about justifying the barbaric acts of Dyer in the name of saving the Empire. McCardie was supposed to be an impartial judge, but he acted like he was a lawyer for O'Dwyer. Together, they painted a picture where they made the jury believe that Amritsar was in a volatile state when the events at Jallianwala Bagh happened only to avoid a mutiny. All the facts presented by Nair's lawyer fell on deaf ears and they couldn't convince the jury of the truth. But, even at the end, there was a chance that there could be a mistrial as the jury could not come to a unanimous verdict. McCardie did not want this case to go for another trial so he asked both parties if they would be comfortable with a majority vote, which means that the side getting the most votes from the jury would win the case. By this time, Nair was tired. His grandson said in his book, 'Nair was tired. The case had originally been filed in the middle of 1922. Two years had passed and, during this time, the case had entirely consumed him. He wanted it to end and to get on with his life. For Nair, it had never been about the money. He had fought this case because he had been asked to give a public apology for a claim he had made in his book – a claim he believed to be true. He had refused to apologise then and instead had chosen to fight the case in an English court. Now that an apology had not been demanded, he felt vindicated.' The terms of the case were now modified as it was mutually decided that the one who won would get £500 plus legal fees. Nair demanded that if O'Dwyer lost, he would apologise to those he wronged in Punjab, and he agreed. However, Nair lost the case, 11-1. He was now held guilty for defaming O'Dwyer. He was asked that if he gave an apology now, the monetary compensation would be ignored but Nair was ready to pay, and firmly refused to issue an apology. Nair, who had spent years working with the British, was disillusioned by the British justice system after this case. He refused to go to trial again, as he was certain that the British would not let their own people down. While Nair was a vocal critic of Mahatma Gandhi, he wrote about Nair's trial in Young India on June 12, 1924, 'By accepting Sir Michael O'Dwyer's challenge, Sir Sankaran Nair has put the British constitution and the British people on trial. They have been tried and found wanting. Even in this simple matter, a man of Sir Sankaran Nair's proved loyalty could not get justice,' the Mahatma wrote. Sankaran Nair is a man whose story deserves to be known by Indians all over the world for he truly fought an impossible fight and even though he wasn't victorious, he was an important part of India's awakening against the British. Most real-life stories are slightly modified when they are adapted in movies, but if one changes the central conflict and the verdict, then it's not even a real story anymore. Kesari Chapter 2 is historical fiction in the garb of an 'untold story'. Sampada Sharma has been the Copy Editor in the entertainment section at Indian Express Online since 2017. ... Read More
Indian Express
03-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Indian Express
Kesari 2 was made with the intention to highlight Sankaran Nair's courage and bravery, says director Karan Singh Tyagi: ‘Our goal was pretty clear'
Kesari Chapter 2, directed by Karan Singh Tyagi, stars Akshay Kumar as C Sankaran Nair, who fought against the British Empire after the Jallianwala Bagh massacre. The film, which is based on the book The Case that Shook the Empire, has been adapted for the film and at the ongoing Waves Summit 2025, Karan explained how he balanced 'facts with drama' for the film. During the SCREEN panel discussion titled 'Old Ghosts, New Generation: Portrayal of Colonial History in Indian Cinema and its Relevance', Karan said that his core intention with making the film was to honour Sankaran Nair's courage and bravery. 'So one of my screenwriting heroes, Aaron Sorkin, said that movies on real-life events and real-life people need not be photographs. They can be paintings. Because a photograph is accurate representation of that period but in a painting, one gets more freedom, more latitude to create drama, to create interpersonal dynamics, which is what we set out to do,' he said and explained his goal with making the film. 'Our goal was pretty clear. Our goal was that the country needed to know about Sankaran Nair and in order to do that, we also had the family's blessings with us because the book that we were adapting, 'The Case that Shook the Empire, was written by Sankaran Nair's great-grandson. So we went on to create a transformational arc for the character by understanding insights from his life where Sankaran Nair goes from a point of being a British aristocrat, somebody who was knighted by the British empire into becoming the country's biggest patriot,' he said. Karan mentioned that they were careful about not deviating from the realities of the massacre that happened at Jallianwala Bagh in 1919. 'We were very mindful that we were not deviating from the factual realities of Jallianwala Bagh so everything that you see about Jallianwala Bagh in the film is accurate and is taken from the book,' he said. In the same chat, Karan also spoke about his intention to make a film about Sankaran Nair's courage and bravery. 'We wanted everyone in the country and the world to know about Sankaran Nair's courage. So every decision that we took, every fact that we adapted was to honour his bravery, was for the country to understand his fight, his struggle,' he said. Kesari Chapter 2 also stars Ananya Panday and R Madhavan.
Indian Express
25-04-2025
- Entertainment
- Indian Express
‘Sankaran Nair put the whole British Empire on trial': Kesari 2 director reveals how Mahatama Gandhi, who had his differences with the lawyer, changed his opinion
Based on the aftermath of Jallianwala Bagh massacre, Kesari Chapter 2 has been in the news for its subject matter and its treatment. The film, after one week, sits at a net India collection of Rs 46.10 crore, with the Akshay Kumar starrer competing with Sunny Deol's Jatt, which has collected Rs 80 crore till now. The director of the film, Karan Singh Tyagi, recently went on a podcast and talked about the background of the narrative, including the relationship between Mahatma Gandhi and C. Sankaran Nair. Nair, who was a believer in the British Empire, quickly changed his stance after the Jallianwala Bagh massacre and decided to call out the colonisers in a book called Gandhi and Anarchy. Tyagi talked about this very incident and how much of the film was directly inspired by the book penned by Sankaran, The Case That Shook The Nation. 'Sankaran Nair wrote a book called Gandhi and Anarchy, and he got sued for defamation for writing that book. The fact that I am a lawyer helps me because to counter the defamation suit, you need to prove what happened at Jallianwala Bagh. So we have kept the soul and the essence from the book (The Case That Shook The Nation)'. He then proceeded to talk about another story which he got from the book that highlighted the relationship between Sankaran and Mahatma Gandhi. 'Mahatma Gandhi and Sankaran Nair had their differences, but after the trial, Gandhi stated that 'Sankaran Nair has not only put Michael O'Dwyer on trial but the whole British Empire on trial, and that they have been found wanting,' he told Bollywood Hungama. Even though many questions have been raised regarding the film's historical accuracy, Tyagi maintained throughout the interview that everything in the film comes from the original literature and that he read several books and testimonies of the survivors. 'We were honouring the sacrifice of people who came to the Bagh to celebrate Baisakhi and left as martyrs, and we were honouring the sacrifice of one of India's forgotten heroes, Sankaran Nair. So we had to be authentic, and we had to be sensitive to the material,' added the director. An alumnus of Government Law College, Mumbai, Karan did his LLM from Harvard Law School. He went on to work at international law firms in Paris and New York, but 'bitten by the Bollywood bug', he returned to India and assisted Vishal Bhardwaj on Rangoon. The historical courtroom drama was released on April 18, and the cast of the film includes Akshay Kumar, R. Madhavan and Ananya Panday.
Muscat Daily
24-04-2025
- Entertainment
- Muscat Daily
Bollywood movie review: Kesari 2
A tale of justice delayed but not denied There have been many movies on the infamous Jallianwala Bagh massacre in India in 1919 – the latest Akshay Kumar starrer Kesari 2 has once again ignited emotions of pain, anger and patriotism. More than 1000 people were killed in the massacre after British General Dyer ordered army troops to open fire on a crowd of civilians rallying in a park. Though the British tried to suppress details, enough pressure had been built to bring forth a proper answer. That's history, and then there's Kesari 2 . At the film's centre is Sankaran Nair (Akshay), a respected Malayali lawyer who was part of the Executive Council. To make him the 'pet' of the empire, he was also bestowed with Knighthood. With time, he was troubled by the events in Punjab that led him to fight a case against the 'Crown' where he blamed Dyre for the genocide. The film is inspired by The Case That Shook the Empire , co-authored by Raghu Palat and Pushpa Palat – descendants of Sankaran Nair. Set against the backdrop of post-massacre colonial India, it follows Nair's defamation case against Michael O'Dwyer, the then Lieutenant Governor of Punjab, after Nair criticised British actions in his 1922 book Gandhi and Anarchy . Directed by Karan Singh Tyagi, the film takes its base from the book and takes creative liberty to make it more dramatic. It is difficult to think of a any mainstream actor in a comedy role and Akshay Kumar has always excelled in it. However, without any doubts of him as a good comedy actor we have very little roles of Kumar where he matches the aura of a serious pain-stricken man. And that is what he does so diligently with the character of Nair in the movie. There has been a clear change in his character and dialogue delivery as the narrative progresses. A few scenes that stand out are Sankaran Nair being stopped for accessing the courtyard as 'dogs and Indians are not allowed', Shankaran's visit to Pargat and Dilreet filing the case with Shankaran's sudden appearance at the court. Post-interval, the Martha Stevens track is very memorable. The climax might seem predictable and yet, it packs a punch. The film ends on an exhilarating note, though the incessant 'F' word slur seemed a bit exaggerated. Sharing the screen alongside Akshay is R Madhavan, who portrays Advocate Neville McKinley, representing the British Crown. Ananya Panday plays the pivotal role of Dilreet Gill, a key supporter in Nair's legal battle. Both the co-stars put a strong performance, though Madhavan could have been given more screen time. Although his character is interesting, he remains mum during the crucial pre-climax and climax sequences. A more engaging climax might have done wonders for the movie. Director Karan Singh Tyagi's choice to turn a historically significant event into a courtroom drama is commendable. The way he blended the courtroom drama format with a historical context pushes the narrative forward in an interesting manner. The background score by Sashwat Sachdev added intensity to a few crucial scenes while the solid cinematography poignantly captured the essence of a bygone era. The editing was equally tight and special credit must go to the tight script and screenplay. While the film raises patriotic feelings among the Indian populace, along with contempt for the condemnable British Raj, it also carries an unnecessary item song (who asked for it?), despite the fast pace which arouses tension, suspicion, and anxiety in every frame. Genre: Period, DramaStarring: Akshay Kumar, R Madhavan, Ananya PandayRating: ***
Indian Express
21-04-2025
- Entertainment
- Indian Express
Kesari 2 director calls Akshay Kumar-starrer ‘synthesis of history and fiction': ‘Films based on real-life events aren't supposed to be photographs'
There's an ongoing conversation around Akshay Kumar's latest film Kesari 2, with many questioning whether it's a fictional story that uses real-life characters. The film stars Akshay in the role of lawyer SC Sankaran Nair, who legally fought the British Empire in the aftermath of the Jallianwala Bagh massacre in 1919. In a recent interaction, the film's director Karan Singh Tyagi addressed the issue and called the film a 'synthesis of history and fiction.' During an interaction with Bollywood Hungama, when Karan was asked if Kesari 2 is a 'synthesis of history and fiction,' he agreed and responded, 'You called it a 'synthesis of history and fiction' — and that's exactly what I wanted it to be. One of my screenwriting heroes, Aaron Sorkin, once said that films based on real-life events aren't supposed to be photographs. They can be paintings. In a painting, there's more room for interpretation, more latitude to dramatize and express an idea.' Karan admitted that he took creative liberties so the film could reach a wider audience. He said, 'That's what I aimed to do. I wanted Sankaran Nair's story to reach as wide an audience as possible. With the support of his family, my co-writers and I set out to portray a man's journey from a British loyalist to one of India's fiercest patriots — someone who used the power of the courts to challenge an empire.' Despite the criticism, Kesari 2 was hailed by several political dignitaries including Delhi Chief Minister Rekha Gupta, Union Minister Hardeep Singh Puri, BJP MP Bansuri Swaraj, Delhi Minister Manjinder Singh Sirsa, and Minister Anurag Thakur during its screening in Delhi. SCREEN review of the film by Shubhra Gupta read, 'While the film is clearly aligned with the Make India Great Again thinking, you can spot a couple of smartly subversive ideas nestling in there. A line about a joint 'Hindu-Muslim' celebration around Ram Navami which happened for the 'first time ' just before the massacre (apparently the dangerous thing that incensed the divide-and-rule British masters so much that it put the pre-planned executions at Jallianwala Bagh into motion, according to the film) tells us such a thing actually happened, something that seems like a receding hope these days. And both the British and Indian lawyers blow the bugle for 'freedom of speech': now where have we heard that phrase before? And can it gain currency again?'
