Recent threats against Hindi film personalities have brought an old question back into public view: how did organised crime gain a foothold in Bollywood, and how much has actually changed? The answer lies less in celebrity than in the way films were financed.
Money came before the muscle
Well before the current names appearing in threat reports, Mumbai’s underworld had moved into the film business. During the 1980s and 1990s, figures such as Dawood Ibrahim, Chhota Shakeel and Abu Salem were linked to film money, extortion and attempts to influence decisions. Haji Mastan was among those known to move in film circles.
Producers often could not raise enough from banks. They turned to private financiers and informal arrangements. That reliance created an opening. An India Today investigation in August 1997 noted that some underworld figures who had earlier financed films were increasingly using threats and extortion. The influence reportedly extended to casting, distribution rights and pressure to attend private events.
The 1997 killing and the fear after it
The violence became impossible to ignore on 12 August 1997, when Gulshan Kumar, founder of the music and film company T-Series, was shot dead outside a Mumbai temple. The case resulted in arrests and a long legal process. In 2021, the Bombay High Court upheld Abdul Rauf’s life sentence for the murder and also convicted his brother Abdul Rashid; the matter involved allegations of a larger conspiracy and links to gangster Abu Salem.
A further shock came in January 2000, when filmmaker Rakesh Roshan was shot outside his Mumbai office and survived. The attack frightened an industry already on edge about threats and demands from criminal networks.
- 12 August 1997: Gulshan Kumar killed outside a Mumbai temple.
- May 1998: Film receives industry status from the government.
- January 2000: Rakesh Roshan shot outside his office.
- October 2000: Entertainment becomes eligible for IDBI-linked institutional finance.
- 2021: Bombay High Court upholds Abdul Rauf’s conviction and convicts Abdul Rashid.
Formal finance changed the equation
The late 1990s marked a shift. In May 1998, the government granted the film sector industry status. In October 2000, a further notification made entertainment eligible for institutional finance under the Industrial Development Bank of India Act. Producers could begin approaching banks and institutions instead of depending on informal private money.
The change was not immediate. Banks remained wary of production risk, patchy accounting and uncertain box-office returns. Still, corporate production houses and formal capital slowly became central to how films were funded. The Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, introduced in 1999, and Mumbai’s police crackdown also weakened the networks that had exploited the old financing gaps.
Today’s threats may revive memories of that period, but the circumstances are not identical. Different networks, locations and methods are now involved, and claims of responsibility are not the same as police-confirmed links. The longer lesson is about financial vulnerability: when an industry lacks legitimate access to capital, informal money can bring influence with it.
Source: India Weekly
Comments