[ad_1]
The court’s order reflects the concerns raised by some sections of the public who believe that such depictions insult their religious beliefs. On the other hand, Husain’s supporters argue that his works were intended to be artistic interpretations and not deliberate provocations.
Many also argue that the magnifying glass held over Husain is a particular expression of Islamophobia, since similar FIRs are not mooted with anything like the same degree of regularity against Hindu authors and artists with (arguably) far more provocative interpretations of Hindu narratives and beliefs.
This case will, however, certainly continue the debate on how to balance creative freedom with respect for diverse religious and cultural values.
However, the court is also likely to decide today, Wednesday, 22 January, whether or not to direct an FIR after a plea alleged that two paintings by Husain in particular hurt religious sentiments.
During the hearing on Wednesday, complainant and advocate Amita Sachdeva, said the most revered entities of ‘Sanatan Dharma’ — Hanuman and Ganesh — were insulted in Husain’s paintings.
“Prima facie case is made out for exhibiting such offensive paintings for public viewing and hurting religious sentiments,” added Sachdeva.
Ordering the seizure, Monga cited the police’s ‘Action taken’ report, which said the investigating officer seized security camera footage and the network video recorder from the art gallery.
The report said the art exhibition was held privately and the paintings, including the two in question, were only to display the original work of Husain.
“At this stage an application has been moved by complainant for direction to the IO to seize the painting in question. In light of the facts and circumstances mentioned in the said application, the said application is allowed and IO is directed to seize the said painting,” the 20 January order said.
With PTI inputs
[ad_2]
Source link