In a brewing controversy ahead of the release of the much-anticipated series, ‘Scam 2010 – The Subrata Roy Saga’, the Sahara Group has voiced strong opposition and is contemplating legal action against the makers. This development marks the third installment in the ‘Scam’ series helmed by director Hansal Mehta, following the critically acclaimed ‘Scam 1992: The Harshad Mehta Story’ and ‘Scam 2003: The Telgi Story’, slated to premiere on Sony LIV.
The announcement of the series stirred a hornet’s nest within the Sahara Group, prompting a swift and vehement response. Sahara India issued a scathing statement, denouncing the portrayal in the upcoming series as “abusive and grossly condemnable.” Expressing deep displeasure, the conglomerate accused the makers of exploiting the Sahara brand for “cheap and wide publicity” and vowed to resist such actions through legal recourse.
According to reports from PTI, Sahara India Pariwar emphasized that the matter between the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) and Sahara remains sub judice before the apex court. The statement cautioned against attempts to influence ongoing legal proceedings, asserting that such actions could constitute contempt of court and potentially criminal behavior.
Central to Sahara’s objections is the portrayal of the conglomerate in the series, which revolves around one of India’s most infamous financial scandals. The saga led to the arrest of Subrata Roy in 2014 on allegations ranging from chit-fund manipulations to defrauding investors. Sahara vehemently refutes any involvement in chit fund activities and frames the dispute with SEBI as a jurisdictional matter regarding certain bonds.
The crux of Sahara’s grievance lies in what it perceives as defamation and tarnishing of its reputation. The use of the term ‘scam’ in the series title, coupled with its association with Sahara, is viewed as a deliberate attempt to besmirch the legacy of Saharasri Ji (as Subrata Roy was affectionately known) and the Sahara India Pariwar. The conglomerate asserts that such actions undermine the goodwill and reputation of individuals who are unable to defend themselves.
The timing of the series announcement adds another layer of complexity to the situation. Subrata Roy, the central figure in the scandal, passed away in November of the previous year after battling a prolonged illness at the age of 75. With the absence of his voice to counter the narrative depicted in the series, Sahara feels compelled to defend his legacy and the integrity of the conglomerate he built.
As the controversy escalates, all eyes are on the impending legal battle between Sahara Group and the makers of ‘Scam 2010 – The Subrata Roy Saga’. The outcome of this confrontation could not only shape the narrative surrounding one of India’s most notorious financial scandals but also set a precedent for the portrayal of real-life events in the entertainment industry.
