Why Oxford University Press had to apologise over a two decade-old book on Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj

The latest apology, this time from OUP India, followed a December 2025 directive from the Bombay High Court’s Kolhapur bench. The defamation case arose from a 2004 complaint by Satara MP Udayanraje Bhosale, a descendant of the ruler.

Who is the author, James Laine, and what was the controversy?

Laine is the Arnold H Lowe Professor of Religious Studies at Macalester College in Minnesota, US. His previous books include Vision Of God: Narratives Of Theophany In The Mahabharata (1989) and The Epic of Shivaji (2001).

One line, in particular, in Shivaji: Hindu King in Islamic India sparked a huge furore as it made references to Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj’s life. Following the backlash, Laine issued an apology in 2003 itself, writing: “I love India and have devoted my life to the study of her culture. I have been thus deeply sorrowed by the fact that my recent book, Shivaji: Hindu King in Islamic India has caused such turmoil there. It was never my intention to defame the great Maharashtrian hero and I had no desire to upset those for whom he is an emblem of regional and national pride, and I apologise for inadvertently doing so.”

That did not stop violent protests by political and right-wing outfits in Pune.

Shiv Sena members manhandled and blackened the face of Sanskrit scholar and historian Dr Shrikant Bahulkar after forcing their way into his office in Tilak Maharashtra Vidyapeeth in 2003. This was because Laine had mentioned him in his book’s acknowledgements section.

Raj Thackeray, who was with the Shiv Sena at that time, later visited the author to apologise over this attack.

And in 2004, protesters stormed the premises of the city’s Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute (BORI), damaging important historical books, manuscripts, paintings, photographs, and copper and clay tablets. In 2017, a sessions court in Pune acquitted 68 members of the Sambhaji Brigade, a right-wing outfit, in the vandalism case.

The legal battle

On January 7, OUP India, on behalf of its former managing director Sayeed Manzar Khan, published an apology in newspapers. The statement said that some statements regarding Shri Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj in the book were unverified. “We sincerely regret publishing those statements. We hereby apologise to Shrimant Chhatrapati Udayanraje Bhosale and the public at large, for any distress and anguish caused to him,” the statement said.

OUP India told The Indian Express in a statement that the book had been published for only a brief period more than 20 years ago before the publisher recalled and withdrew it from circulation.

The OUP statement said: “We always seek to consider cultural sensitivities and context carefully to ensure that our products can be read and enjoyed by as many people worldwide as possible.”

On January 1, three other persons — who said they had no role in writing the book — published a joint apology in newspapers. These are Dr Shrikant Bahulkar, V L Manjul, and Sucheta Paranjpe. Bahulkar and Paranjpe had assisted the author of the book in understanding Marathi literature and grammar, and Manjul was a librarian at BORI whose role was to make scholarly books available to the author.

Advocate Ganesh Gole, representing historian Bahulkar and others, said Udayanraje Bhosale had filed a defamation plea in a lower court in 2004. Gole’s clients then filed a writ petition against the lower court proceedings in the High Court and obtained a stay in 2005.

It is this petition that the court finally disposed of on December 17, 2025, suggesting that the petitioners simply issue an apology.

“So even though we had nothing to do with it, but if it has hurt some sentiments, we also respect Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj and our apology has been given,” said the advocate.

Gole said that an FIR was filed against Laine in Pune under clauses relating to provocation with intent to cause riots and promoting enmity between groups, and that Laine had gotten this FIR quashed by challenging it in the Supreme Court. A government notification banning the book was also quashed by the Bombay High Court and later the Supreme Court after it was challenged, added Gole.

He said: “So (the defamation case was challenged) on the basis of that — since the main author himself has been absolved from the case. These were only a librarian and professors who taught him Marathi and Sanskrit…”