The recent Nagpur violence has once again exposed the deep fault lines in India’s socio-political fabric. While the incident has sparked heated debates, one voice that stands out for its glaring bias is that of senior journalist Rajdeep Sardesai. In his vlog, Sardesai has chosen to blame Hindu political parties and groups for the violence, while conveniently ignoring the role of Islamist provocation in igniting the riots. This one-sided narrative not only distorts the truth but also perpetuates a dangerous double standard in addressing communal violence.

The Nagpur Violence: What Actually Happened

The violence in Nagpur erupted after rumors allegedly spread that a Quran was burned during protests against Aurangzeb’s tomb. While the rumors were later found to be false, they triggered a violent backlash from Islamist mobs, who engaged in stone-pelting, arson, and attacks on police personnel. The riots left the city in chaos, with property damaged and law enforcement struggling to restore order.

The protests against Aurangzeb’s tomb, led by Hindu groups, were indeed provocative. However, it is crucial to recognize that provocation does not justify violence. The Islamist mobs’ reaction was disproportionate and criminal, and it is this reaction that escalated the situation into a full-blown riot. Yet, Sardesai’s analysis conveniently glosses over this critical aspect.

Sardesai’s Selective Outrage

In his vlog, Sardesai spends considerable time criticizing Hindu political parties and groups for their role in stoking communal tensions. He argues that the demand to demolish Aurangzeb’s tomb and the glorification of Chhatrapati Shivaji created a “hate-filled narrative” that led to the violence. He even states, “To unleash a hate-filled narrative where you want to go and demolish Aurangzeb’s tomb, you must be prepared for some reaction and a backlash.”

While there is some truth to the idea that divisive narratives can fuel tensions, Sardesai’s analysis stops short of holding the Islamist mobs accountable for their actions. By focusing solely on the actions of Hindu groups, Sardesai paints a picture where Hindus are the aggressors and Islamists are merely reacting. This is a dangerous oversimplification of a complex issue. It ignores the fact that the violence was initiated by Islamist mobs who chose to take the law into their own hands. Sardesai’s failure to condemn this violence unequivocally reveals a clear bias in his reporting.

The Double Standard In Reporting Communal Violence

Sardesai’s approach reflects a broader trend in Indian media, where Islamist provocation is often downplayed or ignored in discussions of communal violence. When Hindu groups are involved, they are quickly labeled as “communal” or “divisive,” but when Islamist mobs engage in violence, their actions are often excused as a “reaction” to provocation. This double standard not only undermines the credibility of the media but also perpetuates a culture of impunity for those who resort to violence.

In the case of the Nagpur violence, Sardesai’s analysis fails to address the criminality of the Islamist mobs. Stone-pelting, arson, and attacks on police are not legitimate forms of protest; they are acts of violence that must be condemned without reservation. By glossing over this, Sardesai seems to effectively give a free pass to those who disrupted peace and endangered lives.

Sardesai’s analysis of the Nagpur violence is a classic example of selective outrage and biased reporting. By ignoring the role of Islamist incitement and focusing solely on Hindu groups, he has perpetuated a one-sided narrative that distorts the truth and undermines the pursuit of justice. His statement, “To unleash a hate-filled narrative where you want to go and demolish Aurangzeb’s tomb, you must be prepared for some reaction and a backlash,” reflects his tendency to shift blame onto one side while seemingly excusing the other.

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post Rajdeep Sardesai Justifies Nagpur Violence As Backlash For ‘Provocation’ appeared first on The Commune.

Ever since the Nagpur violence broke out, be it the leftists or the Opposition MPs and other anti-BJP commentators, everyone seems to be blaming Hindus and the movie Chhaava for it. Some, including the news media, even went a step further to claim that Maharashtra CM Devendra Fadnavis himself blamed the movie Chhaava for igniting the riots. Here are some of those claims.

CM & HM Devendra Fadnavis blames Chaava the movie for the violence. Amazing that a movie on the valour of Chattrapati Sambhaji Maharaj is now being called the instigator.
Shameful blame game!

— Priyanka Chaturvedi (@priyankac19) March 18, 2025

Maharashtra CM Devendra Fadnavis blames the movie 'Chhaava' for the public's anger in Nagpur against Aurangzeb.

Someone should remind him that it was BJP leaders and PM Modi who were praising this film day and night! pic.twitter.com/H2tsLRNzmP

— Akshit (@CaptainGzb) March 18, 2025

Another day, another misleading headline from Hindustan Times.

Nowhere in his speech did CM Devendra Fadnavis 'blame' Chhaava movie for the Nagpur violence!

He stated that the movie portrays the truth of Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj, which has ignited anger against Aurangzeb in… https://t.co/GTNyAbYKPw pic.twitter.com/LHGmMo6Sg4

— Cons of Media (@ConsOfMedia) March 18, 2025

Cinema doesn’t “influence” the society – or it does? Devendra Fadnavis blames #VickyKaushal’s #CHHAAVA  for the ongoing issue in Nagpur pic.twitter.com/WsJS8DfDFx

— Samina Shaikh (@saminaUFshaikh) March 18, 2025

Wow!! Just look at this BJP CM Devendra Fadnavis

Now he is subtly blaming the movie #Chhaava for the violence in Nagpur

Just a few days back he was backing removal of Aurangzeb Tomb and supported this agenda

Abh saara theekra movie pe fod do!!

Typical sanghi character ! pic.twitter.com/u7qBwe4MU6

— Ritu #सत्यसाधक (@RituRathaur) March 19, 2025

#NagpurViolence: Maharashtra Chief Minister DevendraFadnavis says #Chhaava brought the history of Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj to the fore and ignited public anger against Mughal ruler Aurangzeb.

Read: https://t.co/hLrV0crgkG pic.twitter.com/RrUt0qPfJ2

— NDTV Profit (@NDTVProfitIndia) March 18, 2025

What Did Fadnavis Say?

Maharashtra CM Devendra Fadnavis spoke in Marathi on the floor of the state Assembly. This has been twisted by non-Marathi speakers as him blaming the movie for the riots. In reality, he said, “In this situation, everyone must show restraint. How to maintain law and order and mutual respect should be everyone’s effort. This is my appeal. Today in Maharashtra, and I am not blaming the movie, in fact, Chhaava movie showed the real history of Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj. People are angry with Aurangzeb, their feelings are raw but we still should maintain law and order.”

First of this Italian import doesn’t understand Marathi. Secondly she is known for lying through her lipstick tainted teeth.

Here is what #Fadnavis actually said. He praised the movie not blamed it #Chhaava #NagpurRiots https://t.co/B1OO58Aylx pic.twitter.com/OYq7eGjOAT

— Princess Woke Liberal (@pwokeliberal) March 19, 2025

This twisting of translation seems to be a concerted effort by the divisive forces to fuel more unrest in the state.

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post Nagpur Violence: How Fadnavis’ Words Were Distorted To Stoke Tensions appeared first on The Commune.

Nagpur witnessed large-scale communal violence on Monday night (17 March 2025), leading to injuries, arson, and a significant law enforcement crackdown. The unrest, which erupted just 2 km from the RSS headquarters, left 34 police personnel, including two IPS officers and two firemen, injured. In response, Nagpur Police arrested Fahim Shamim Khan, a local leader of the Minorities Democratic Party (MDP), identifying him as the alleged mastermind behind the violence.

Khan’s Arrest and Police Investigation

Khan, the city president of the MDP and a resident of Sanjay Bagh Colony in Yashodhara Nagar, was taken into custody on Wednesday, hours after being named in an FIR registered at Ganeshpeth Police Station. Police officials cited video evidence showing him allegedly delivering an inflammatory speech just before the clashes broke out. The 38-year-old has been remanded to police custody until 21 March 2025.

A former Lok Sabha candidate from the Nagpur constituency, Khan contested against Union Minister Nitin Gadkari in the 2024 general elections but lost by over 6.5 lakh votes. His alleged role in inciting violence has drawn strong reactions from authorities, with police stating that his speech directly escalated tensions.

The Violence And Its Aftermath

The unrest began amid protests demanding the removal of Mughal emperor Aurangzeb’s tomb in Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar. Rumors of a holy book’s desecration during a right-wing demonstration further fueled tensions. Mobs engaged in heavy stone-pelting, torched two JCB machines and 40 vehicles, vandalized police vans, and clashed with security forces at Chitnis Park Chowk. Riot-control police, including anti-riot commandos, faced severe attacks, prompting authorities to impose curfews in several areas under Section 163.

By Tuesday, 50 rioters were arrested, and 19 accused were sent to police custody on Wednesday. The Union Home Ministry has sought a report on the violence, which comes weeks ahead of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to the city. Authorities suspect that misinformation spread through social media played a significant role in mobilizing crowds.

Heavy Security Deployment

Over 2,000 police personnel have been deployed across central Nagpur, covering sensitive areas like Mahal, Chitnis Park Chowk, and Bhaldarpura. Key roads, including Fawwara Chowk, Gandhi Putla Chowk, and Badkas Chowk, have been sealed off. Security forces are using riot-control vehicles, water cannons, and tear gas units to maintain order. Intelligence agencies and the Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) are investigating potential security threats linked to the unrest.

Despite the violent clashes, a senior police official stated that the law-and-order situation is now under control, though curfews remain in place in various sensitive areas. The police continue to monitor the situation closely, ensuring that further escalations are prevented.

(With inputs from India Today)

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post Nagpur Riot Mastermind ‘Minorities Democratic Party’ Leader Fahim Shamim Khan Arrested By Maharashtra Police appeared first on The Commune.

In a recent video, leftist rag The Wire has once again demonstrated its penchant for peddling biased narratives by squarely blaming Hindus and the film Chhaava for the recent communal tensions in Nagpur. This sensationalized and one-sided account not only distorts the facts but also fuels division by targeting a specific community and cultural expression.

The report, which heavily relies on the opinions of ‘journalist‘ Nikhil Wagle, attempts to paint the Nagpur riots as a pre-planned conspiracy orchestrated by Hindu organizations and the BJP-led state government. It alleges that the film Chhaava, which depicts the life of Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj, was used as a tool to incite violence against Muslims. However, this narrative conveniently ignores the complexities of the situation, and the role of all stakeholders involved.

Misrepresentation Of Facts

Wagle claims that the riots were a direct result of Hindu organizations targeting the tomb of Mughal emperor Aurangzeb, with the film Chhaava serving as a catalyst. While it is true that tensions escalated following protests and counter-protests over Aurangzeb’s legacy, they fail to acknowledge the provocative actions and inflammatory rhetoric from the Islamists. Instead, he singles out Hindu groups and the film, portraying them as the sole instigators of violence.

Wagle also alleges that the state government and police were complicit in the riots, citing instances of inaction. Wagle says, “I believe that the Devendra Fadnavis government was aware that something is going to happen because of this agitation, that riots will be sparked. The Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis was himself involved in instigating the feelings of the people. He was the one who said that Aurangzeb’s tomb must be destroyed but I cannot do that because 50 years ago, it was given security and it has archival values and the Congress government has preserved it. Nitesh Rane always instigates through his speeches, Raja Singh also does it but Devendra Fadnavis on the floor of the house has made an instigatory speech against Aurangzeb’s tomb. I allege that Devendra Fadnavis wants riots in Maharashtra, he wants the Phule-Ambedkar legacy to be destroyed, and that the ideology of Hedgewar, Golwalkar, and Savarkar be established here.”

The Wire has declared Hindus and the movie Chhava as the culprits of the Nagpur riots.

Islamists came, torched Hindu vehicles, injured dozens of Hindus, but still, Hindus are the culprits.

How dare they make a movie showing historical facts without a liberal agenda?… pic.twitter.com/VWZNxaMoBY

— Political Kida (@PoliticalKida) March 18, 2025

The Wire’s decision to blame Chhaava for the riots is particularly egregious. The film, which celebrates the legacy of a revered Maratha king, is a cultural expression that resonates with millions of Hindus. By linking it to the violence, The Wire demonizes Hindu sentiments. This is a clear attempt to stoke cultural and religious divisions rather than fostering understanding and dialogue.

The interview conveniently glosses over the role of Islamist organizations and leaders in escalating tensions. It fails to mention the inflammatory speeches and actions such as torching Hindu businesses, vehicles, injuring Hindus and such – that have been the reason behind the unrest. By presenting a one-sided narrative, The Wire does a disservice to its readers and perpetuates a dangerous us-versus-them mentality. It is the Hindus who are the victims and not otherwise. 

This is not the first time The Wire has reported in a biased manner, covering up facts – here are 31 instances of fake news peddled by the pro-Congress leftist propaganda rag.

By blaming Hindus and Chhaava for the violence, it ignores the complexities of the situation and fuels communal tensions. Instead of promoting dialogue and understanding, The Wire has chosen to fan the flames of division.

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post The Wire Blames Maharashtra CM Fadnavis, Hindus, And Chhaava For Nagpur Riots appeared first on The Commune.

Fake news peddler and propagandist YouTuber Akash Banerjee is back with another misleading video, this time discussing the impact of the film Chhaava. He attempts to downplay Aurangzeb’s well-documented brutality and Hindu resistance against his tyrannical rule, accusing the film of oversimplifying history into a “good vs. evil” narrative. Banerjee further claims that Aurangzeb’s actions, often perceived as religiously motivated, were purely political and that Hindu and Muslim rulers alike engaged in similar tactics.

However, the real distortion occurs when Banerjee goes as far as portraying Aurangzeb as a secular leader, even hinting at him being Hindu-leaning!

Akash says, “It is also a fact that in the entire Mughal history, if there were more Hindu mansabdars in any ruler’s court, it was in Aurangzeb’s court that he had 33% of them. It was not a compulsion for him. But from the point of view of politics, this was a good strategy to keep Rajput’s support base intact.”

He cites these figures from Athar Ali’s book, The Mughal Nobility Under Aurangzeb, to support his argument, claiming that Aurangzeb had more Hindu mansabdars (officials) than any other Mughal ruler. According to Banerjee, Aurangzeb had 33% Hindu nobles in his court, which he suggests was not due to compulsion but rather a calculated political strategy to maintain Rajput loyalty.

The Reality: What Athar Ali’s Book Actually Says

While Banerjee cherry-picks figures to push his agenda, a closer look at the very same book reveals a different picture. Here’s the actual breakdown of Hindu representation in the Mughal nobility over time:

• Akbar’s rule: 22.5%
• Shah Jahan’s rule: 22.4%
• Aurangzeb’s first phase (1658-1678): 21.6% (a decline!)
• Aurangzeb’s second phase (1679-1707): 31.6%

At first glance, it might seem that Hindu representation increased under Aurangzeb in his later years. However, as Athar Ali clarifies, this increase was not due to Aurangzeb’s benevolence or political strategy but rather compulsion. The surge in Hindu nobles was driven by the influx of Marathas, who began to outnumber Rajputs in the nobility. This was not due to Aurangzeb’s “tolerance”—Marathas forced their way in as Aurangzeb struggled in the Deccan, compelling him to recruit them in a desperate bid to maintain control.

Athar Ali explicitly states, “The number of Hindus in Aurangzeb’s second regime is inflated because of the influx of Marathas who began to outnumber the Rajputs in the nobility. They were not recruited to the service on account of religious tolerance. Marathas had practically forced their way in. Before Aurangzeb’s fatal involvement in the Deccan had compelled him to begin admitting Marathas wholesale in order to secure nobles, he had in fact tried to reduce the number of Hindu nobles. This is clear from the figures for 1658-78.”

This directly contradicts Banerjee’s claim that Aurangzeb was skillfully maintaining Rajput support. In reality, Rajput representation declined during his second phase, as the Marathas replaced them. The book says, “As we have seen, the number of the Rajputs began to decline towards the end of the period, and continued to go down in the next.” Aurangzeb did not “choose” to increase Hindu representation—it was an act of desperation to salvage his failing campaign in the Deccan.

Akash Banerjee ko gazab pela pic.twitter.com/OXdhB1WZti

— BALA (@erbmjha) March 14, 2025

The Bigger Picture: Who Really Dominated Mughal Nobility?

Even with the increase in Hindu mansabdars towards the latter part of Aurangzeb’s reign, their representation never exceeded 31.6%, despite Hindus making up two-thirds or near about that figure of the regional population. The majority of Mughal nobility was composed of Iranians, Turanians, and other foreigners who had no linguistic, cultural, or historical ties to India. This shows the deeply discriminatory nature of Mughal governance, where native Hindus remained underrepresented even in their own land.

Banerjee’s attempts to whitewash Aurangzeb’s rule by selectively citing statistics is yet another example of his deceptive tactics. The full context of Athar Ali’s research clearly disproves his narrative. The increase in Hindu mansabdars was not a result of Aurangzeb’s tolerance or strategic genius but a forced concession due to his military failures. Far from being a “secular” ruler, Aurangzeb actively sought to diminish Hindu influence in his administration whenever possible and only relented when circumstances forced his hand.

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post The Real Story of Aurangzeb’s Hindu Mansabdars: Compulsion, Not Strategy As Claimed By YouTuber Akash Banerjee appeared first on The Commune.

First, this movie needed to be made. Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj was a Sanatani hero, a man who did not give up on his faith to save his life. What little I had heard of him earlier made him out, unfairly, to be a wastrel and not a patch on his illustrious father. That needs to be rewritten and disseminated to the upcoming generations.

Vicky Kaushal IS Sambhaji. He exudes that confidence and aura that one would expect from a king.

The man who really does steal the show is Akshaye Khanna, as Aurangzeb. If you didn’t know that he had played the role, you wouldn’t have figured it out. His transformation is stark and that brooding menace, malevolent, yet turning increasingly defeatist, is well done.

The costumes are well made and seem pretty authentic. The sarees worn by the women are gorgeous and, as my wife assures me, are reflective of those likely worn by Marathi women of that day and age with Benaras silks and Paithani sarees predominating.

Now for the bits that bothered me.

Every historical depiction I see on screen in India, I automatically compare to the serial from the 80s, Chanakya. And EVERY single one of them falls short, including this one.

The screenplay is very amateurish. The dialogues are stilted. The fights all appear the same after a while. The repeated screaming by Vicky Kaushal with closeups of his clenched jaws or wide-open mouth can only be appreciated so many times.

The characters all seem to be caricatures, barring Sambhaji and Aurangzeb, maybe. The guy who is seditious, is shown with nervous, shifty eyes. It seems more like theatre with the exaggerated facial contortions than cinema.

Continuity is another problem. The story spans a number of years, but you wouldn’t know it from looking at the actors. Rashmika Mandana looks pretty but never seems to age even as her kids miraculously seem to grow up, with Rajaram growing up to become a 7-8 year old. Even Shambhaji doesn’t seem to age during that time. These are simple issues, and I am not sure why our filmmakers do not pay attention to them.

And the music. Oh God, the music. Loud, jarring, insistent, incessant. Orchestral hits are great for key moments. But if the entirety of the music is a never-ending stream of clashing cymbals and loud brass sections, it gets very annoying. I just looked it up, and am stunned that the music director is AR Rahman. I mean, what????!!!!! It was as amateurish an attempt as me playing on the keyboards with the “orchestral hit” setting.

Actually, if anyone wants to make a historical film, please just give it to Ilaiyaraaja Ayya. He would have done a fabulous job. If you couldn’t him, then give it to Atul-Ajay.

ARR perhaps forgot that pauses are good. EVERY SINGLE scene has music. Whether it is Sambhaji or Aurangzeb or any other character speaking. They all appear unspeakably noble or unspeakably villainish and the music will beat you over the head to make sure that you understand who is depicting what aspect!

Overall, I expected better. I am glad the story has been told, and that people will now dig deeper to understand who Chatrapati Shambhaji was and about his courage and valour. For that I am grateful.

But just as a movie? Disappointed.

Arun Krishnan is the author of Battle of Vathapi: Nandi’s Charge.

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post Chhaava: The Tale Of Sambhaji Maharaj – A Heroic Story Lost In Poor Filmmaking appeared first on The Commune.

Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj is well-known across the country but there is very little that we Indians know about his son, Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj. Not many Tamils know that Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj, or Shambhu Raje as he was dearly addressed, played a great role in restoring the Nataraja idol to Chidambaram Temple. Displaced during the Bijapur Sultanate’s ransacking in 1648, the idol was hidden and temple rituals halted. Sambhaji, with his Guru Muthaiya Dikshitar and official Gopala Dadasi, retrieved and reinstalled the idol, renovating the temple. A Tamil verse on a copper plate commemorates this event, marking Nataraja’s return in the month of Karthigai after 37 years.

After Shivaji Raje, Sambhaji Raje holds a significant place in the hearts of Marathas. His history was never told the way it should have been – be it his burning thirst to fulfill his father’s dream of Hindavi Swarajya, the barbaric torture he faced at the hands of the tyrant Aurangzeb, or how he refused to convert in order to save himself while being tortured.

The Film

Chhava, the film starring Vicky Kaushal (of Uri and Sam Bahadur fame) in the titular role with Rashmika Mandanna playing Maharani Yeshobai offers a powerful performance – bringing to life the characters they are playing. Vicky Kaushal looks like a lion all through the film, he roars (a lot, yes) but that can be forgiven. In fact, every single cast in the film has done an amazing job and has elevated the film – so much so that people were seen leaving the theatres weeping. The film, while not so tight in its story, portrays the Marathas in a fabulous light – that they truly deserve. The fight scenes, the iconic guerilla tactics of the Marathas, and the legendary scene where Maharaj fights a lion, have been portrayed exceptionally well. The film also shows us a glimpse of how talented Shambhu Raje was – he speaks in English in one scene with a British officer and we also get to see how rich the empire was, the grand Rajyabhishek and how prosperous our country was in those days.

The story does not include too much about Shambu Raje’s life but given the time limit, the makers try to do as much justice as they can. Some of the negatives include the heavily Urduized dialogues, the lack of Maratha accent or dialogues in the film, and the fact that Aurangzeb praised Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj at the beginning of the film and does the same when Shambhu Raje passes – this bit particularly felt a bit off. There is history of Aurangzeb calling Shivaji Maharaj a “mountain rat“, but whether he praised him is kind of baffling. For a tyrant who found pleasure in killing and torturing people, no matter how great the enemy, would he have praised him? I think not. 

In the film, they also do not show much of the torture that was meted out to Shambhu Raje – the peeling of the skin, the beheading, the display of the head in public, the mutilation of the body and such. In my opinion, it was kept clean for family audiences and today’s generation of moviegoers are unable to stomach what had happened in the past.

The first half is a bit slow, and the real action starts in the second half. The film truly hit the core of the audience’s hearts the moment Shambu Raje and his camp came to know of the betrayal by his own relatives which leads to the Mughals catching them unprepared for war. The way Raje fights singlehandedly facing a thousand Mughal soldiers – that moment you see the real Sambhaji Maharaj, the way he fights on despite knowing he has been cornered, and his captivity and subsequent death are only moments away. You are left in awe of the hero that he was and the respect he deserves from us. From the time he is chained and brought in front of Aurangzeb till the last minute of the film where he is shown to die, is what takes the film to another level. Maharaj’s interactions with the Chandogamatya Kavi Kalash in the climax leave you with a lump in your throat.

Deplorable Music By A So-Called ‘Legend’

While Aurangzeb killed Shambhu Raje in real life, it was “legendary music composer” AR Rahman who killed the film and the majestic hero in reel. AR Rahman was the biggest misfit in the film, and he destroyed what could have been an epic that would have remained in public memory for a long time.

Rahman’s music for Chhaava was a shockingly below-average and out-of-tune soundtrack for a period film that deserved so much more. Rahman’s work here isn’t just disappointing; it’s downright pathetic, and it single-handedly kills the soul of what could have been a powerful historical epic.  

No Marathi Touch

Let’s start with the most glaring issue: the music feels completely disconnected from the Maratha culture and the 17th-century setting. For a film rooted in Maharashtra’s rich history, where was the regional flavor? There was absolutely no hint of traditional Marathi musical essence in any part of the film, maybe a Dhol Tasha in the passing just happened by mistake.

What we got to listen to was a bizarre mishmash of Arabic tunes, Middle Eastern beats, and jarring electronic elements that feel like they belong in a 2010s rom-com or a Spanish fiesta, not a period drama about Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj. The background score is so out of place that it actively distracts from the film’s narrative, pulling you out of the experience every time an ill-fitting tune kicks in.  

Did the filmmakers not update AR Rahman that the film was about Sambhaji Maharaj and not Aurangzeb?

Why Does Rahman Even Sing?

Let’s take Aaya Re Toofan which was supposed to be a powerful, anthemic track to rally the spirit of Shambhu Raje and also the Maratha warriors. Instead, it feels like a half-baked attempt that lacks the punch and grandeur it needed. Rahman’s decision to sing the song himself is baffling, especially when someone like Sukhwinder Singh could have elevated it to another level. The song tries to tick Marathi music checkboxes but does so in the most forced and unconvincing way.

We are forced to compare this to Malhari from Bajirao Mastani, which effortlessly captured the Maratha spirit and became an instant classic. Aaya Re Toofan falls flat, and its inability to resonate with the audience is a testament to Rahman’s failure here.  

Then there’s Jaane Tu, a song that feels like it was plucked straight out of a mediocre rom-com with its piano crooning in the background. The tune is forgettable, the lyrics are uninspired, and even Arijit Singh’s voice can’t save it. This is supposed to be a moment where Maharani Yesubai (played by Rashmika Mandanna) worships the return of her warrior king, but the song lacks any emotional depth or cultural authenticity. It’s a far cry from the kind of music that should accompany such a poignant scene in a historical drama.  

And guess what, you even get to hear a rap song! Imagine being this disconnected to the soul of the film!

Mughal Movie Or Maratha Movie?

Rahman’s background score is equally atrocious. The moment Akshaye Khanna, playing Aurangzeb (he nailed the role beyond perfection), delivers his dialogue, you’re suddenly hit with a Middle Eastern tune that feels more suited to a desert caravan than a Maratha court. And then, out of nowhere, electronic elements creep in, completely ruining the mood. The sound design is so inconsistent and jarring that it takes away from the film’s otherwise well-executed action sequences and visuals. The war scenes, which should have been elevated by a rousing score, are instead undermined by Rahman’s insipid compositions.  

Moments that called for an upbeat, rousing BGM were instead met with sounds that felt completely out of place. The moment where Shambhu Raje sees the betrayers deserved another fitting BGM that would move audiences to tears and fury, but we hear nothing. The horror of the barbaric torture is not brought out well by the background score – it seems to fit a film on the Mughals, rather.

Could Someone Else Have Done A Better Job?

It’s baffling why the filmmakers didn’t opt for the sons of the soil, Ajay-Atul, who have repeatedly proven their mastery over Marathi music and larger-than-life soundscapes. Their work in films like Sairat and Natrang showcases their deep connection to Marathi culture, and they could have brought the authenticity and grandeur that Chhaava desperately needed. Even a bad film like Panipat, which had its flaws, managed to deliver memorable songs like Mann Mein Shiva that resonated with the audience. In contrast, Chhaava’s soundtrack is utterly forgettable.  

Lazy Attempt & Trashy Music

Rahman’s inability to capture the essence of the period is even more glaring when you consider the cultural richness of the source material. Rahman’s music fails to transport you to the 17th century. Instead, it feels like a lazy, half-hearted attempt that lacks proper historical research and cultural sensitivity. Rahman seems to fit in only with Mughal period films, middle Eastern origin/desert cult stories may be his forte. Being from the south, he has absolutely no inkling of what stature Shambhu Raje had, and his place in the hearts of the people – maybe Rahman must stick to his favourite Sufiyana style music.

Shameful

The film itself has its merits – brilliant performances, astounding cinematography, well-shot war sequences, costumes, etc. But all of this is overshadowed by Rahman’s disastrous music. For a composer of his stature, this is nothing short of shameful. Chhaava deserved better, and so did the audience.

A man who was the lion’s cub, a king who worked towards Hindavi Swarajya, the man who prayed for his stempmother’s wish to unseat him to come true, the man who refused to let out even a squeal of pain when tortured in the most heinous and barbaric methods, the man who refused to convert in order to save his life despite being skinned alive, the man who refused to give in to the most dastardly tyrant that ever lived – Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj deserves greater respect and a magnificent portrayal and even more thunderous music to showcase his lived history – that AR Rahman utterly failed to do justice to, even by an inch or rather, a note.

A.R. Rahman’s lifeless, out-of-touch-with-reality compositions are the biggest disservice there ever was to the Maratha legacy and to Shambhu Maharaj and a slap in the face to anyone who expected better from a composer of his caliber. This isn’t just a disappointment; it’s a betrayal of the trust audiences have placed in Rahman over the years and for killing Shambhu Raje once again. 

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post If Aurangzeb Killed Sambhaji In Real, AR Rahman Kills In Reel With His Trash Music appeared first on The Commune.