Team Goemkarponn
PANAJI: Veteran theatre and film actor Sharad Ponkshe has strongly refuted allegations made by Goa’s Art and Culture Minister Govind Gaude, who accused him of attempting to malign the minister’s reputation by allegedly taking a “supari” (contract) to do so.
Responding to Gaude’s claims, Ponkshe dismissed the remarks as baseless, asserting that such language reflects the mindset of those accustomed to operating in a world driven by money and underhanded deals. “People who speak of supari are the ones who live in that world. I am an artist, not someone who indulges in such things,” he said.
The controversy erupted after a performance of Ponkshe’s acclaimed Marathi play Purush was disrupted last Sunday at the Kala Academy in Panaji due to technical issues. The actor had apologised on stage to the audience, later criticising the state government for poor management of the venue, which he said had undergone costly renovations.
“There was water leakage from the air-conditioner in the makeup room despite crores being spent on renovations. I simply asked where that money was spent,” Ponkshe said. He added that he had no prior knowledge of Gaude, only learning his name from the audience during the disruption.
Rather than accepting responsibility and assuring that such disruptions wouldn’t recur, Ponkshe said, the minister instead chose to target him with false accusations. “Calling me a ‘Suparibaaz’ is shameful. The minister should have apologised to art lovers and promised improvements,” he stated.
Ponkshe also demanded that the Kala Academy be managed by individuals who understand and value art, suggesting that professional sound and light engineers be mandatorily present during performances to avoid such incidents.
In his earlier remarks, Minister Gaude alleged that Ponkshe had deliberately taken his name in the media to damage his image, claiming, “These people have taken supari to defame me.” He also rejected Ponkshe’s assertion that the play’s production team did not use the Academy’s sound system, stating that any technical fault could have been easily resolved.
The verbal exchange has triggered a wider conversation about the state’s handling of cultural infrastructure and its treatment of artists.
