
Creative liberties or historical accuracy? Bollywood seems to favour the former
- Select a language for the TTS:
- UK English Female
- UK English Male
- US English Female
- US English Male
- Australian Female
- Australian Male
- Language selected: (auto detect) - EN
Play all audios:

Seeing that they could not win, GT Kulkarni's _The Mughal Maratha Relations: Twenty Five Fateful Years (1682-1707)_ mentioned that Sambhaji had shaved off his facial hair and hid either
in a hole or a temple, where he was subsequently caught by the enemy’s military leader, Muqarrab Khan. Kulkarni's book states that Kalash was caught first, and Sambhaji was caught
after. Moreover, all the literature that we went through described a greater degree of torture and humiliation for the two, which we will not add links to due to the graphic nature of the
content. While one can understand that a film may take creative liberties to show the protagonist as a powerful, mighty character, it is very important to understand that these films cannot
be treated as the truth of how things happened centuries ago. Take for example, Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s 2018 film _Padmaavat_, which was retitled to its current name from Padmavati. During
filming, Bhansali was attacked by members of the Karni Sena, a Rajput group, who were offended due to the film allegedly depicting the titular character, Queen Padmini, in poor light.
Several groups across the country also called for a ban on the film’s release, going as far as filing a case with the Supreme Court for the same. Four states - Gujarat, Rajasthan, Madhya
Pradesh, and Haryana, did in fact, prohibit the film from being released in their states. However, the petition was overruled by the apex court, which said that freedom of speech had to be
maintained, directing the states to ensure that the film was screened in an orderly manner.