Two incidents after the natural death of fascist and ‘don’ of Mumbai, Balasaheb Thackeray, personally moved me to write on an issue that is innocuous, because writing about or on him means somewhere or the other giving recognition to his deeds. One became national news; the other was the result of personal interaction. First, the news that attracted national attention in India: the Mumbai-based 21-year-old Shaheen, in her comment on Facebook, described Bal Thackeray as an ordinary individual. This comment landed her and one of her friends who liked this comment in all sorts of legal trouble. Both of them were arrested and detained until midnight by the Mumbai Police. They were out on bail granted by the local court the next day. This act by the Mumbai Police has been criticised by many intellectuals and leaders of political parties. They expressed their support for Shaheen’s right of freedom of expression. The second incident was about a small-time shopkeeper and a few students from Bihar, struggling in Delhi, who were in an upbeat mood after hearing the news that Bal Thackeray was dead when I met them. Both Shaheen and the poor Biharis have valid reasons to feel the way they do. Bal Thackeray was a villain to them. They did not find any reason to commiserate on his death. Overtly or covertly, they had suffered due to him or his politics of hatred. Either Shaheen, being a Muslim girl from Mumbai, must have experienced or she must have been familiar with his views on minority communities, especially Muslims. Biharis too have legitimate reasons not to express grief on his death. The wounds of verbal and physical attack by Thackeray’s men on Biharis during the BJP-Shiv Sena government in Maharashtra are yet to heal. Throughout his life, Balasaheb Thackeray preached hatred and incited tensions and riots in the name of religion and region. He spread a reign of terror in Mumbai and Maharashtra. The first victims of his poisonous ideology were the South Indians working in Mumbai, who were attacked by Thackeray’s men. In his acts, he was supported by many industrialists, who wanted to weaken the strength of the trade unions that had South Indians in substantive numbers. That gave him popularity in and around Mumbai. The incident that provided Thackeray and his party national popularity was the demolition of the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya in 1992. He led the Hindu communal brigade in Mumbai and Maharashtra. His men participated in the demolition process and afterwards engaged in the communal riots in Mumbai. Since then, he had been actively engaged in spreading venom against the minorities through writings in his party’s mouthpiece Samna, or his public speeches and statements. He, unequivocally, used abusive language against the minorities. He also went to the extent of calling them traitors or agents of Pakistani intelligence agency ISI. He was at the forefront in stopping the Pakistani cricket team from playing a cricket match in India. Even from his deathbed, he issued a public statement calling on “patriotic” Hindus to create all sort of hurdles during the upcoming India-Pakistan cricket series. Thackeray’s next victims were the poor economic migrants from Bihar and eastern Uttar Pradesh to Mumbai and Maharashtra. On his call, the Shiv Sena cadres publicly beat those helpless migrants; their properties were attacked, homes were ransacked and a few even died. Many of them were forced to return to their native places, leaving behind their jobs and all their belongings. For his brutalities, he gained support from the locals through his slogans like “Jai Maharashtra”, “Marathi Manus”, and “Mumbai for Maharashtrians.” This is not a revelation. Everyone in India knows about his politics; still, some paid a rich tribute and called him a “great man”, “loss of an inspiration”, etc. I guess these people must have done so due to fear of Thackeray’s men. If not, then they must have the same feelings for Adolf Hitler, Idi Amin, and August Pinochet et al. Almost all news channels live telecast his last journey, making him an extremely important man in India. A few channels, after counting the number of people gathered during his last rites, compared him to Mahatma Gandhi. Of course, the number of people gathered at Shivaji Park where he was cremated was more than the people who attended Mahatma Gandhi’s last rites but in the case of the latter, people came out of respect, while for Bal Thackeray, it was mostly due to fear. Even Mumbai was closed for a day out of fear from the Shiv Sainiks and not as a mark of respect for the departed soul. To conclude, some are born great, some achieve greatness, and on some greatness is thrust. Balasaheb Thackeray belongs to the last category of people. After his death, people who suffered due to him or his poisonous ideology have every right to celebrate. They have the right to heave a sigh of relief. There is a caveat; a leader is dead, not the poisonous ideology that he indoctrinated into the minds of many. The writer is an assistant professor (guest) at the Delhi University, New Delhi. He can be reached at amitranjan.jnu@gmail.com