Jump to content

Does ‘Chhapaak’ portray acid attack convict as a Hindu named ‘Rajesh’? No, false claim


randomGuy

Recommended Posts

FALSE CLAIM

Alt News contacted Newslaundry co-founder Abhinandan Sekhri who attended the screening of Chhapaak in Delhi. “I watched the special screening of the movie which was organised for acid attack survivors, and the claim on social media that the accused is portrayed as belonging to the Hindu community is false. The person who is convicted is presented as belonging to the Muslim community, and so are his relatives, with one of them shown in a Burkha,” he said.

Sekhri also called-out Swarajya’s erroneous report on Twitter.

 

Shocking (or maybe not) that such demonstrable misinformation is carried. I watched the screening last night & can tell you with certainty the religion of attacker has not changed. Film has remained accurate to the case. Opinidia ko bachane ke chakkar mein khud Opindia ban gaye.. https://twitter.com/SwarajyaMag/status/1214871873055363073 

 
 
 
 

According to PTI journalist Radhika Sharma’s report, “In the Meghna Gulzar directed film, there is no mention of any Nadeem or Naeem Khan. Moreover, Rajesh is the name of Malti’s boyfriend.”

 
 

“The screening was organised by NCW. The person convicted for the acid attack is known as Bashir Khan urf Babboo in the film, whereas Rajesh is the name of the boyfriend of the acid attack survivor, Malti,” Sharma informed Alt News. The journalist covered the movie’s screening for PTI. 

Times Now broadcast also debunked the false claim.

AN ORGANISED ATTEMPT

The usual suspects Prashant Patel Umrao, Shefali Vaidya, author Ravi Rai, Anuj Bajpai and @Nationalist_Om suggested that the Muslim identity of Laxmi Aggarwal’s perpetrator has been whitewashed in ‘Chhapaak’.

Untitled-design-2020-01-08T174525.216.jp

Sonam Mahajan whose tweet drew over 7,000 retweets at the time of writing this article wrote, “If crime has no religion, then why does Bollywood feel the need to change the religion of perpetrators even in biopics?” Mahajan was one of the earliest to float the false claim.

453b7ad7-a8f7-48d6-9dc6-524af1d13d6b.png

Rohit Jaiswal who identifies himself as a ‘film critic’ questioned, “If Acid attacker name was Naeem Khan then the same name should have been used in film as well… Ye Rajesh kya hai??”

4350bfa5-d984-45c9-a70b-2a75cc0db597.png

One Monica (@TrulyMonica), who terms herself an ‘ex-journalist’ on Twitter, also circulated the false claim.

213b7c04-7f03-40b1-8313-250e85164d84.png

Vikas Pandey (@MODIfiedvikas) tweeted “I knew this” and claimed that the attacker’s name was changed to ‘Rajesh’. He later took down the tweet.

WhatsApp-Image-2020-01-08-at-20.11.47.jp

It is noteworthy Swarjaya later updated its report with the correct information, although clarification on its tweet – “The main accused in Lakshmi’s acid case was Naeem Khan but he is said to have been named “Rajesh” in Deepika’s movie” – is yet to be provided.

Selection_08_01_2020_003.jpg

Furthermore, Free Press Journal carried a misleading report titled, “#NameItLikeBollywood trends after Deepika’s ‘Chhapaak’ ‘changes’ acid attacker’s name from Nadeem Khan to Rajesh”. The article clarifies the misinformation only in the concluding paragraph.

‘Chhapaak’ is set to release on January 10, 2020, and the claim that movie whitewashes the Muslim identity of the attacker who threw acid on Laxmi Aggarwal, by portraying him as a Hindu, was found to be false.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

One can have right to opinion but can't have right to boycott?

She lied! With the possible intention to have people boycott the movie.

 

She could just have started a #letsboycottDeepikaPmovies campaign. How dare she stand in protest.

But no, Shefali Vaidya chose to concoct a farcical story about how the movie has misrepresented the perpetrator.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dont know whats the big deal. She can go and do what she wants as long as she isnt breaking law . 

 

Vijay Malya has to return such huge amount of money to public banks. I dont see anyone with Boycott Kingfisher posters anywhere. 

 

Edited by jf1gp_1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mariyam said:

Terrible from Shefali Vaidya. Peddling lies and trying to rally people to boycott the film. Just because Deepika has an opinion which match her own.

That's noting she was even making fun of trans genders . Amount of Venom these people spew can even make snake less venomous .

Edited by Stuge
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, jf1gp_1 said:

Dont know whats the big deal. She can go and do what she wants as long as she isnt breaking law . 

Vijay Malya has to return such huge amount of money to public banks. I dont see anyone with Boycott Kingfisher posters anywhere. 

 

Deepika Padukone/ Producers of the movie could sue for defamation.

What has Vijay Mallya's (in cohorts with SBI)  fraud to do with this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...