Reactions to Maqbool Fida Husain’s works have always been extreme. The response to his painting of a naked woman, knees drawn in the shape of India’s physical boundaries, in February this year, was immediate and violent. Effigies of the artist were burnt, an art show was disrupted in Ahmedabad, followed by death threats and criminal complaints over the treatment of the picture.

But did Husain actually name this painting in question Bharatmata?

According to a transfer petition filed by the 90-year-old artist in April, the title Bharatmata was not given by him. Nor was the work ever publicly displayed, or put up for public sale. The name of the painting, he said in the petition, was given without his knowledge.

The title name had provoked widespread protest even after auction organiser, Chennai-based Apparao Galleries, withdrew it from the bidding process held between February 6 and 8 in New Delhi.

Husain’s lawyer Akhil Sibal said the work, which was not titled, was sold to a private collector in 2004. “The artist was not in any way involved with the auction,” he said.

In April, Husain sought transfer of the various private complaint cases filed against him in different cities to Delhi. While the state has not so far prosecuted Husain, only private criminal complaints have been filed in cities such as Bhopal, Indore, Rajkot, Pandharpur (Maharashtra), Mumbai and Delhi.

In April this year, the Supreme Court had stayed the proceedings in the complaint case filed in Rajkot and Bhopal. In the complaint case filed in Indore, the court stayed execution of bailable arrest issued by the judicial magistrate. It has also stayed proceedings in a criminal complaint in Pandharpur.

... contd.