Learn to expand your brain to understand art: DAG to complainant who said MF Husain paintings insulted gods
While the complainant argued that gods “have been shown holding nude women” in M F Husain paintings, the lawyer for Delhi-based DAG said “there are misleading facts in the complaint”.
3 min read
n January this year, while Judicial Magistrate First Class Sahil Monga of Patiala House Court refused to order an FIR against DAG, he ordered a seizure of the "offensive" paintings. (Express File Photo/Representative)Addressing a city court on Friday, an art gallery in Delhi said the concern of one person who objected to two “offensive” paintings by M F Husain displayed during an exhibition last year “can’t be seen as the concerns of the whole community”.
The person in question, Amita Sachdeva, had sought an FIR under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) Section 299 (deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs) against DAG, which was formerly known as Delhi Art Gallery.
In January, a magistrate order had refused to direct an FIR. Advocate Makarand D Adkar, who represented the complainant, moved the Court of Additional Sessions Judge Sumit Dass of Patiala House against this order.
On Friday, Adkar said Hindu Gods were insulted, who had approached the court seeking an FIR against DAG over the “offensive” M F Husain paintings.
To which DAG’s counsel said before the court, “The sketches were there for 30 days during the exhibition. Thousands of people saw the painting. No one except the complainant (Sachdeva) objected. Their concerns can’t be seen as the concerns of the whole community.”
“You need to expand your brain a little to understand art,” he added.
Referring to various judgments, Adkar then said a case of Section 299 under the BNS was made out. “Our gods have been insulted… They have been shown holding nude women. The complainant is the eyewitness, she took photos,” Adkar argued.
“Husain had earlier also made nude goddesses. There were multiple complaints against him… There was not even an apology. This is not the way to deal with Sanatan Dharma,” he said.
To this, Judge Dass asked, “Is there any sort of censorship that applies within the confines of an art gallery?”
Adkar replied, “Law imposes a self-censorship… Any obscene painting can be made and put in my bag. But the moment it leaves my bag, it becomes public. That’s where the problem lies… I’m saying just spare my gods (Hindu gods)”.
DAG’s counsel argued that “there are misleading facts in the complaint… Husain died with a clean slate”.
Adkar said: “Can we perceive that a person who put the painting up on the wall didn’t know the implications?”
Judge Dass then posted the matter for April 21, when arguments on the aspect of filing an FIR will continue.
In January this year, while Judicial Magistrate First Class Sahil Monga of Patiala House Court refused to order an FIR against DAG, he ordered the seizure of the “offensive” paintings.
Sachdeva is an advocate who practises at Delhi High Court. She had earlier said, “On 04.12.2024, I clicked photos of offensive paintings displayed at DAG World at 22A, Windsor Place, Connaught Place, New Delhi, and filed a complaint on 09.12.2024 at Parliament Street police station after researching past FIRs against M F Husain. However, during a visit with the IO on 10.12.2024, the paintings were removed and falsely claimed they were never displayed.”
DAG, which was established in 1993, houses the most extensive collection of premodern and modern Indian art from the 18th century to the 20th century.
You May Like
