India : Muslim family forced to leave theatre for not standing during national anthem

[Nilgiri]

The mob in the theater - Physical confrontation, physical and verbal harassment, implicit and explicit threat of physical harm to the family including a small child. None of these factors are present in your NBA analogy. The NBA, as a private sports league with its own sets of rules acted within those rules after months of Rauf not standing for the anthem and engaged in off-line negotiations with the player and his representatives. The NBA did not confront Rauf during his 'passive action' at the basketball court, screamed and yelled in his face, threatened his physical safety and forced him to leave the stadium as was done with this family.

Again - the appropriate analogy to the Rauf/NBA incident would be a situation in which the other patrons quietly voiced their complaints to the management and the management took up the issue with the family at some point when the movie was not playing to understand their side of the story and explain the rules to them and what the consequences of not following the rules in the future would be.

When did the incident occur? Who is the family? Have they finished discussing the issue internally and with legal representatives to understand the process, costs and requirements of a legal challenge?

What we do know, on the basis of various links posted here by @Raja.Pakistani and @oFFbEAT that quote Indian judicial rulings and legal experts, is that it doesn't appear the family violated any laws or is liable for any punitive actions for allegedly remaining seated during the national anthem:

Not standing up for national anthem not an offence, say legal experts - The Times of India

By law are we required to stand for the national anthem? : FYI, News - India Today

Mumbai family forced out of cinema for not standing up for National Anthem | TwoCircles.net

As long as whatever was 'said to him' was done as part of proper/official negotiations between the player, his legal/league representatives and the NBA, and not part of some court-side mob yelling, screaming and threatening him.

The links I posted above referencing Indian judicial rulings and quotes from Indian legal experts don't support the allegation that the family did anything illegal, and the certainty with which the mob, you and many Indians on this thread were cheering the mob's harassment and threatening behavior towards the family only further validates my argument that, barring a tangible negative impact as a result of the violation of a law (arson, theft, violence etc), the alleged violation is best left to the proper authorities to handle.

The rest of your post is largely irrelevant at this point because the judicial rulings and legal views quoted earlier don't support the claim of the passive act of 'not standing during the national anthem' constituting a violation of the respective laws. Assuming the courts don't change their existing interpretation of the law, the family has grounds for a very strong civil case against the theater management for not ensuring public order and the security and safety of the family and allowing them to be subjected to emotional distress, at no legal risk to themselves under the 'respect to national anthem statutes'.

OK bhai I will let you have the last word on our exchange (after this - my last response to you on this topic) since we are going in circles now.

It has been good to exchange views with you and I appreciate your position (however idealistic I may see it as).

But my main points summarized are:

a) pragmatic realities always trump lofty idealism on the ground, especially when the lofty idealism has the possibility of causing even more harm to all involved in the end.

b) such a situation is present worldwide and is a root part of human psyche and existence

c) We can always aspire to be totally unemotional, completely civilized and imagine that our legal system specifically legal enforcers are ideal....but we should not judge particular situations too harshly when no physical violence has been extended to anyone.

d) the NBA player may have been privately disciplined to tote the mainstream line......but each time he actually implemented this agreed compromise.....it was a very public affair and everyone was watching him. It is definitely a mob enforced public humiliation each time he had to stand to the national anthem against his personal conviction.....especially when there was no overarching legal requirement for him to do so ( and the US court would back him up if he chose to do that....say he was fired if he outright refused to).

e) The family in question here have the complete freedom to approach an Indian court for justice if they feel they were the only ones being wronged here. You cannot talk for them, only they can....and it is only their decision.

If they don't choose this option, the default reason that any observer can make at the minimum is that they feel they could not come out of such a thing unaffected....even legally....because they did break a law in view of multiple witnesses....first and foremost.....and will open themselves up for prosecution.

Same exact thing goes for the drunk on the bus that I saw being evicted by my fellow passengers. It was mob enforcement, and technically illegal......but then would he really kick up a huge fuss about it knowing he's going to open himself up to higher relative prosecution in the first place? No reasonable lawyer will advise him to do that (if he even chooses to approach one in the first place)....just like no reasonable lawyer will advise this family to do so either.

No one's going to take people to court for minor scuffles, contract enforcement and disorder for the exact same reason.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

There is a limit to bending over in the name of liberalism and secularism.

There is no limit - either the laws and constitution are followed (and the laws and constitution do not appear to make standing during the national anthem a crime, based on Indian judicial rulings and legal experts), and people are allowed to make choices that do not tangibly impact others around them without having to suffer harassment, fear and threats of violence from extremist mobs, patriotic, religious or otherwise.

Rabid nationalism is going the route of rabid religiosity, with equally frivolous and imbecilic triggers for outrage like 'hurt sentiments' over cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad or a refusal to stand during a national anthem.

 

[dray]

There is no limit - either the laws and constitution are followed (and the laws and constitution do not appear to make standing during the national anthem a crime, based on Indian judicial rulings and legal experts), and people are allowed to make choices that do not tangibly impact others around them without having to suffer harassment, fear and threats of violence from extremist mobs, patriotic, religious or otherwise.

Rabid nationalism is going the route of rabid religiosity, with equally frivolous and imbecilic triggers for outrage like 'hurt sentiments' over cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad or a refusal to stand during a national anthem.

Is there a law in Pakistan that prohibits people from disrespecting Mohammad Ali Jinnah? If there is none, then is it desirable to do so in the crudest manner possible?

There is no law in India at least that prohibits me to disrespect Mohammad Ali Jinnah, or your national flag, in any manner I feel like, will you support that?

There is probably no law that makes it mandatory for you to respect your parents, hence is it okay for you or anyone else to disrespect their parents?

I can be in a funeral and start singing a Honey Singh song while others are observing silence, no law prohibits me from doing so, but is it the right thing to do?

All the matters of ethics and morality may or may not be written in the law books.

 

[CorporateAffairs]

A video about a Muslim family asked to leave a theatre because they did not stand for the national anthem is gaining attention on social media.

The over two-minute video clip shows a few people arguing with the family, who they accuse of making excuses for not standing up when the national anthem was playing. The video shows the family, surrounded by the group of people, trying to defend itself, but the efforts are in vain.

The Muslim family is forced to leave the theatre and the people present there welcome that with applause.

The video has been posted on Facebook and shared thousands of times. It is also being circulated on WhatsApp and other messaging platforms.

Though the authenticity of the video's location is not verified, some reports say it is from Mumbai, others say it is from Bengaluru.

Muslim family forced to leave theatre for not standing during national anthem - The Times of India



PAK MEDIA :
Govt-backed intolerance: Muslim family forced out of theatre in India



Govt-backed intolerance: Muslim family forced out of theatre in India
Last Updated On30 November,2015 03:46 pm

As the family left, the footage shows Hindus rejoice their 'win'.
BANGALORE (Dunya News) – Muslim family was reportedly forced out of a movie theatre as Modi government becomes habitual of denying growing intolerance in India.

A video went viral among the smartphone users over the weekend.

The footage shows few extremists pressurizing a Muslim family who stepped out of house for outing during the weekend and landed up in a theatre to watch a film.

The family members are seen arguing the unfounded notions endorsed by the Hindu extremists in the footage however, they had to leave. Other cinemagoers watched the harassment and none deemed it right to defend the victimized family.

As the family left, the footage shows Hindus rejoice their ‘win’.

India is unarguably moving towards a distorted image of ‘tolerant’ and ‘secular’ since Prime Minister (PM) Narendra Modi came to power. The PM who openly endorses a rather extremist viewpoint of Hindutva finds harassment of Muslims and minorities legitimate.

Several BJP leaders have voiced baseless hatred against Muslims in the recent past with one going as far as saying that they should leave India and move to Pakistan. Hindu extremist wing, Shiv Sena enthusiasts including known faces have questioned much revered entertainment celebrities’ nationality and roots for denouncing intolerance.

Know also:Conditions in India worsening, worried about kids: Aamir Khan

In the most recent of the dogma-incited controversies, Sena had announced Rs 1 lac for anyone who would slap Aamir Khan. The much condemnable and ridiculously stupid reward scheme came after Khan joined the ‘anti-intolerance’ club among several notable personalities and activists.

Know more:Shiv Sena offers Rs 1 lakh reward to anyone who slaps Aamir

‘Rang De Basanti’ star had said on a platform that he is concerned over future of children in India, a society which is feeding off intolerance.

The alleged provocation against the government prompted Advocate Manoj Kumar Dixit to file a sedition case against Khan in a session court of Kanpur.

Earlier, a superstar whose father was one of the youngest freedom fighters who fought for India against British colonization, Shahrukh Khan had to take flak for joining the ‘award-return brigade’. Members of the extremist parties had termed Shahrukh a Pakistani agent.

A celebrity who has received national decorations and has taken India in foreign heartlands through his fame and cinema had to be answerable about his nationality in his homeland. Yes, that is India.



Govt-backed intolerance: Muslim family forced out of theatre in India - World - Dunya News

Theatre? These traitors should be booted out of the country. Muslim, Hindu, Christian, does t matter!

 

[Nilgiri]

It is quite ludicrous to compare a non-violent eviction of a family from an establishment to the mass self-inflicted carnage that resulted across the Muslim world because of the mohammed cartoons.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Is there a law in Pakistan that prohibits people from disrespecting Mohammad Ali Jinnah? If there is none, then is it desirable to do so in the crudest manner possible?

There is no law in India at least that prohibits me to disrespect Mohammad Ali Jinnah, or your national flag, in any manner I feel like, will you support that?

There are laws against Ahmadis and Blasphemy, horrible and indefensible ones, that I oppose, but I am not aware of any against MA Jinnah. In all of the above, I have opposed mob violence and will oppose mob violence.

There is probably no law that makes it mandatory for you to respect your parents, hence is it okay for you or anyone else to disrespect their parents?

Legally speaking, yes, there is nothing wrong with disrespecting my parents or listening to someone else disrespect my parents, verbally. Of course this is a general comment. My parents and/or I have the option to resort to legal action in case such 'disrespect' amounts to slander, libel etc.

I can be in a funeral and start singing a Honey Singh song while others are observing silence, no law prohibits me from doing so, but is it the right thing to do?

I provided a link earlier to the SCOTUS decision in favor of a man protesting and criticizing homosexuality at the memorial of a US Marine (who was openly gay), attended by the marine's family and friends.

The family took the man to court, they did not gang up on him at the memorial, harass him or threaten him as a mob or try to impart vigilante justice, despite the fact that the protester's speech was extremely disrespectful and in extremely poor taste.

All the matters of ethics and morality may or may not be written in the law books.

I agree, and the people shouldn't take the law into their own hands to try and enforce what amounts to a subjective interpretation of 'disrespect' or 'morality', as the mob in the theater did.

The mob's reaction was unjustified even if legal opinion had not been on the side of the family.

It is quite ludicrous to compare a non-violent eviction of a family from an establishment to the mass self-inflicted carnage that resulted across the Muslim world because of the mohammed cartoons.

The underlying attitudes are the same - irrational and emotional reactions to frivolous issues such as cartoons or refusal to stand during a national anthem. What do you think would have happened had the family stuck to their principled, and legally protected apparently, position of refusing to leave and refusing to apologize to the mob?

 

[Eminent Mainstream Media]

The underlying attitudes are the same - irrational and emotional reactions to frivolous issues such as cartoons or refusal to stand during a national anthem. What do you think would have happened had the family stuck to their principled, and legally protected apparently, position of refusing to leave and refusing to apologize to the mob?

People stood there to honor the heroes of Mumbai who were martyred in the line of duty in order to save their city-

Legally the family should've been charged with sedation and probed for espionage angle- covering rest of their relatives- I hope IB takes a note of this- already there have been half a dozen arrests of these kind of people trying sell their country to the enemy-

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Legally the family should've been charged with sedation and probed for espionage angle- covering rest of their relatives-

For doing what exactly and under what law?

 

[FullMetalJacket]

We don't sing the national anthem for funsies and kicks. We don't sing it because there's some religious context in them. We sing and honor national anthems because it displays patriotism. I don't believe they were singled out because they were muslims, they were just ignorant. Hindus and Muslims have died for India, and they are both equal in patriotism. The media loves to spin the story into a religious discrimination

 

[The_Showstopper]

They should have been booked, bahut charbi chad gayi hai kuch logo ko.

Haan beta jab modi photu lene ke chakkar me raashtr dwaj ka apman bhi andekha kardeta hai, jab yeh baat nahi nikli tere moo se... Charbi toh feku pe chad gayi hai videsh ghoom kar..

 

[Eminent Mainstream Media]

For doing what exactly and under what law?

The expression “disaffection” includes disloyalty and all feelings of enmity-

IPC Section 124A

Row over UP Governor Ram Naik stopping national anthem midway | The Indian Express


UP governor..


Row over UP Governor Ram Naik stopping national anthem midway | The Indian Express

President and Governor are constitutional seats- they represent the constitution- so they may stop the National Anthem- If Its required- and It was done in constitutional spirit-

 

[The_Showstopper]

20 pages over this news LOL... I haven't seen anyone discussing it during the below situation...

 

[Raja.Pakistani]

People stood there to honor the heroes of Mumbai who were martyred in the line of duty in order to save their city-
-

Cinema hall are places for entertainment and these are not places to pay tributes to victim of 26/11 and then enjoy 3 hour movies with songs and dances.

 

[Eminent Mainstream Media]

Cinema hall are places for entertainment and these are not places to pay tributes to victim of 26/11 and then enjoy 3 hour movies with songs and dances.

Explain that to the Bollywood star and producer Farhan Akhtar- son of the famous Javed Akhtar- I belive they would know more about Cinema halls and entertainment than you- who seem to have a Bollywood inspired name even-

 

[Raja.Pakistani]

Explain that to the Bollywood star and producer Farhan Akhtar- son of the famous Javed Akhtar- I belive they would know more about Cinema halls and entertainment than you- who seem to have a Bollywood inspired name even-

Yea it definitely look odd place to remember or to do mourning for victim of 26/11 before watching vulgar mujre and dance masti.

My name has nothing to do with bollywood and i have been explained it dozen time. I had this nick Raja before even Amir khan acted in Movie Raja.Hindustani. Janjuas in pakistan either use janjua or raja as a nickname so thats how Raja. Pakistani . I personally dont bother using it with my real name but when i have to hide my name then i use this nickname