Film critic Rajeev Masand was questioned for eight hours on Tuesday by Mumbai police investigating the suicide of actor Sushant Singh Rajput. The police reportedly asked him about his journalistic work, including gossip columns such as one written three years ago in which he said an actor, who he did not name, had a reputation of being a skirt-chaser.

Veteran journalists could not recall an earlier instance of a scribe being called in connection with a film industry suicide for questioning over gossip columns, which have never been taken seriously or considered for their news value.

Three days before Masand’s interrogation, actress Kangana Ranaut — who has rekindled the Bollywood “nepotism” debate, made grave allegations against several bigwigs and stirred an intense churning in the film industry already facing unprecedented flak over Sushant’s suicide — had named the journalist in TV interviews among those she feels should be questioned in connection with the case.

In interviews with Republic’s English and Hindi news channels on Saturday, Kangana referred to a 2013 episode of the talk show Koffee with Karan featuring actress Alia Bhatt, one of Kangana’s frequent targets.

In keeping with the free-wheeling and unabashedly frivolous show’s format, Johar had asked Alia in a rapid-fire-round question who she would “kill, marry and hook-up” with, the options being Sushant, Ranveer Singh and Ranbir Kapoor. Alia had replied: “Marry Ranbir, kill Sushant, hook-up with Ranveer. Sorry, Sushant.”

Kangana, during Saturday’s interviews, held this up as evidence of the intentions of a section of Bollywood whom she, and countless others, have accused of forming cabals to deny “outsiders” a toehold in the film industry.

“When Alia is saying he (Sushant) should be killed, he must be thinking, ‘nobody said anything?’”

It’s anyone’s guess who is closer to finding out the motive of Rajput’s suicide — the police or Kangana, who has, in fact, called it a “murder”. What is certain is that in the theatre of the absurd, only the most outrageous utterances count as evidence.

The biggest casualty seems to have been Johar, who has faced widespread condemnation for displaying blatant favouritism, providing grand launch pads to supposedly undeserving “star kids”, indulging in groupism to keep “real talent” out, taunting Sushant repeatedly in his chat show and sidelining and landing his career in jeopardy. Under severe social media assault, Johar has not been seen on any platform for a month now.

Republic TV has been hosting debates since Sunday on the impact of “nepotism” on the film industry — the premise being the popular allegation that Rajput, a young man from Patna who found stardom without the help of any godfather in Bollywood, had probably committed suicide because “favouritism” by powerful stakeholders had denied him the films he wanted to be part of.

Over the past month since Sushant’s suicide on June 14, there has been an unwavering focus on the alleged injustice meted out to the talented actor. Social media platforms have been flooded with videos on Sushant in an unprecedented outpouring of public sympathy and anger. Multiple theories have been floated on the death and calls for a CBI probe have got shriller by the day.

During Sunday’s debate on Republic TV, footage of South Indian actress and activist-lawyer Kasturi Shankar, one of the panelists, having pongal for lunch while the anchor went on a “diatribe” against co-panelist and actor-director Samir Soni has been widely shared on social media.

Kasturi later explained on Twitter that she had been waiting to speak for 67 minutes and since Arnab Goswami, the editor-in-chief and anchor, “wasn’t gonna let me talk anyways, so I left and grabbed lunch. But forgot to sign off Skype.”

Kasturi told The Telegraph: “I wanted to say that nepotism exists in every field. It opens doors, but does not help you succeed. Samir Soni dared to not only contradict Arnab but also Kangana…. Arnab went on a diatribe against him for more than an hour. If I had to only nod my head in assent, I figured I needed to have lunch for the energy to keep at it.”

Sudhir Mishra Telegraph picture

Veteran film journalist and author Ziya Us Salam of Frontline magazine, said nepotism wasn’t new in Bollywood but what appeared now like a witch-hunt over film reportage was certainly a new low.

“If you accuse Rajeev of wrongfully giving a film a lower rating, you are questioning his integrity. How will anyone ever give an honest review in future? Cinema publications are sold on the basis of gossip columns. They are rumours not be taken seriously.”

Salam said he couldn’t recall any film journalist being grilled for their journalistic work linked to a Bollywood star’s suicide.

During Saturday’s interviews, Kangana also referred to the Khans of Bollywood and named Alia, Katrina Kaif and Jacqueline Fernandez while speaking about people’s preference for “foreign people”.

Kangana, who had said she was ready to meet the police, has now been summoned to speak about the “suicide gang” she blames for Sushant’s death.

BJP MP Subramanian Swamy has offered her legal help and demanded a CBI probe. Another BJP parliamentarian, Baijayant Panda, has asked for a probe into the purported influence of Pakistani spies in Bollywood. BJP MP Roopa Ganguly has been relentless in seeking “justice” for Sushant on social media.

Besides filmmakers Johar, Mahesh Bhatt and Aditya Chopra, who have faced the brunt of the anger over Sushant’s death, some others have emerged as the villains of the piece. Incidentally, these people — directors Anubhav Sinha, Anurag Kashyap and Sudhir Mishra, and actresses Swara Bhasker, Tapsee Pannu and Richa Chadha — have been frequent targets of Right-wing trolls.

The nepotism debate has also taken another turn with Kangana and many others accusing “outsiders” like Tapsee, Swara and Kashyap of now being in cahoots with the same Bollywood clique that allegedly works to destroy the careers of those not part of the charmed circle.

Sinha, Kashyap and Mishra, considered the contemporary avant garde, have spoken out against nepotism but tried to nuance their arguments, which has not been palatable to trolls.

After facing the fury of the trolls, Sinha had tweeted on Tuesday: “ENOUGH!!! I hereby resign from Bollywood….”

After several news outlets began to report that Sinha won’t be making films anymore, he had to clarify in a tweet: “Of course I will only make movies. In fact more. But I am dramatically changing my own logistics…. Will tell you more in times to come.”

Sinha, the man behind critically acclaimed and commercially successful films like Mulk, Article 15 and Thappad, told this newspaper: “There is a feeling that you must either subscribe to this narrative (of a cabal of established film personalities abetting Sushant’s suicide) or you are the enemy. There is very little room for people to coexist….

“Five years back when two superstars, Aamir (Khan) and Shah Rukh (Khan), said that we have become intolerant, then the word intolerant became taboo. People went after them. Today there is intolerance all around.”

Sinha added: “Obviously if you are born in a certain family or a city you have certain privileges, like I have the privilege of knowing more about this country because I am from the heartland.

“Yes, people look out for their friends and family, but if you become an institutional hater or disser, and you pull people down, then it should be condemned…. The current debate on nepotism is superficial. If anyone speaking in a louder voice calls you an ‘insider’, that simply becomes the truth.”

Mishra, who had made the audience sit up and take note with Hazaaro Khwaishein Aisi in 2003, told this correspondent: “There is a general discontent among people who are not from elite backgrounds or westernised upbringing or who feel they are unsophisticated. They have come into their own and are demanding their space.

“They are in positions of power too — be it members of the IAS or graduates of the IITs from middle-class backgrounds. Imagined victimhood is gaining ground in India, and everybody is angry, and anything can trigger them.”

He added: “There is also genuine victimhood of communities, people from certain places who are upset for the right reasons. Since 1947, we have not had the difficult conversations we should have had. Their feeling of victimhood has not been addressed because we have not spoken to each other about it….

“We need maturity to take attacks on ourselves. Maybe a certain conversation does not suit me, but I still want to listen to what someone has to say.”