Netflix’s latest web series “IC 814: The Kandahar Hijack” has flown into a storm of controversy early this week when numerous social media users expressed their anger over the names given to four of the hijackers in the critically-acclaimed series. In response to the public uproar, the Information & Broadcasting Ministry has taken swift action, summoning Monika Shergill, the content chief of the OTT platform, for a meeting.
Moreover, a public interest litigation has been filed before the Delhi High Court by the president of the Hindu Sena outfit. The legal plea accuses the series of distorting the religious identities of the hijackers by naming two of the five hijackers as Bhola and Shankar. The litigation seeks the revocation of the certification of the series, aiming to prevent further distribution and consumption of the show pending resolution.
Directed by acclaimed filmmaker Anubhav Sinha, “IC 814: The Kandahar Hijack” is a six-episode series that dramatizes the hijacking of the Indian Airlines IC-814 flight on December 24, 1999. The Airbus A300 plane took off from Kathmandu for Delhi and was subsequently diverted through a path that included Amritsar, Lahore, Dubai, and ultimately Kandahar in Afghanistan, then under Taliban control. Following six days of intense negotiations, the hijacking ended with the Atal Bihari Vajpayee-led NDA government agreeing to release three notorious terrorists—Masood Azhar, Omar Saeed Sheikh, and Mushtaq Ahmad Zargar—in exchange for the safe return of the passengers and crew on board.
The series is loosely based on “Flight to Fear,” a first-hand account of the events written by Captain Devi Sharan, the pilot of the plane, and journalist Srinjoy Chowdhury. Despite the inclusion of some real-life events, a disclaimer on the series strictly categorizes it as a work of fiction.
The controversy over the depiction of the hijackers’ names stems from the creative liberties taken by the creators of the series. These liberties, in particular, involve not making it explicitly clear that the terrorists used codenames during the hijacking. The argument posits that it should be openly acknowledged that such information cannot be presumed known by the entire audience.
.
Many historical and journalistic accounts from that period do indeed confirm that the hijackers operated under aliases. They refer to a press release issued by the Union Home Ministry on January 6, 2000, which disclosed the real names of the hijackers as Ibrahim Athar, Shahid Akhtar Sayeed, Sunny Ahmed Qazi, Mistri Zahoor Ibrahim, and Shakir. The same press release added, “To the passengers of the hijacked plane, these hijackers came to be known respectively as (1) Chief, (2) Doctor, (3) Burger, (4) Bhola, and (5) Shankar, the names by which the hijackers invariably addressed one another.”
While some members of the public express a clear understanding of the distinction, their concern tends towards the potential for future misunderstanding as memories of the hijacking events recede from public awareness. Amit Malviya, a leader of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), aired his grievances on social media platform X, stating, “The hijackers of IC-814 were dreaded terrorists who acquired aliases to conceal their Muslim identities. Filmmaker Anubhav Sinha legitimised their criminal intent by furthering their non-Muslim names. Result? Decades later, people will think Hindus hijacked IC-814.”
The series does not explicitly clarify that Bhola and Shankar are codenames, though it does reveal the true identity of Chief when negotiations start to break down. Journalist Neelesh Misra, who has also authored a book on the subject, highlighted in an X post that Chief was actually the brother of Masood Azhar. Relative to the series’ broader narrative, Bhola and Shankar are minor characters, referenced by their codenames only once across the six episodes.
While the intricacies of using codenames may seem like a minor detail to some, the impact it has on the portrayal of historical events and collective memory is profound. The backlash against “IC 814: The Kandahar Hijack” serves as a potent reminder of the responsibility filmmakers bear when dramatizing real-life incidents. As this row unfolds, it will be revealing to see how the streaming giant Netflix, and indeed the legal systems, navigate these choppy waters of historical representation, creative freedom, and public sentiment.
