Tiger, Tiger Burning Bright! Why Lawrence Bishnoi’s Latest Attack Should Not Surprise Bollywood

On October 18, as Tiger Shroff was leaving a football ground in Mumbai’s Juhu area (a place he frequents), bike borne assailants open fired at his car. The Lag Jaa Gale actor escaped with minor injuries, but his driver and a bystander were not that lucky. Since then, the entire episode has spiralled into an elaborate story of Bollywood’s uncomfortable history with the underworld – one shaped by money, fear, influence and an uneasy proximity between the glamour of the film industry and the dark alleys of organised crime.

And in many ways it is not entirely wrong, the attack on  for which multiple reports/ theories are surfacing – is just an addition to a long list for  which has had a fractured relationship with the underbelly of society. From the days when gangsters allegedly financed films, demanded protection money and attempted to influence casting decisions to the chilling threats issued against celebrities in recent years, the relationship has repeatedly oscillated between cooperation, coercion and confrontation.

What the firing on Tiger Shroff has done is just brought this troubled history back into focus. The incident has triggered an investigation into an alleged attempt to target the actor. Investigators are examining the movements of the accused, including reports of reconnaissance at locations associated with Shroff. The case has also drawn attention to the alleged involvement of people linked to the Lawrence Bishnoi gang.

Even as the investigation continues, what it has, however, done is revive a disturbing question – Why does Bollywood, an industry built on fantasy, stardom and spectacle, continue to find itself vulnerable to the realities of organised crime? The answer is fairly complicated – partly seeped in history, it is dotted with the spotty relationship between celebrity, money and power that has long made the Hindi film industry attractive to criminal networks.

The uncomfortable relationship between Bollywood and Bombay (Mumbai) reached its pinnacle between the 1980s and 1990. The  operated in an environment where legitimate financing was not always easily accessible and films required enormous investments and the promise of lucrative returns. Here, criminal syndicates saw an opportunity. The film business offered access to money, glamour, influential personalities and a network that extended beyond India. Dawood Ibrahim, Chhota Shakeel, and Abu Salem increasingly financed films with Abbas-Mustan’s 2001 Chori Chori Chupke Chupke (starring Salman Khan, Rani Mukerji, and Preity Zinta) becoming one of the most thoroughly documented cases – involving Chhota Shakeel.

The relationship, however, was not a uniform one. Some alleged connections involved financial dealings, others centred on threats, extortion or attempts to influence professional decisions. Rumours and unverified claims often blurred the distinction between genuine criminal links and the mythology surrounding gangsters. Allegedly Abu Salmen pushed for the casting of Monica Bedi in the 2001 film Jodi No 1. Similarly, Dawood Ibrahim reportedly pushed for Mandakini’s casting in the 1985 Ram Teri Ganga Maili.

But what was very real was the violence. The 1997 killing of music baron Gulshan Kumar outside a temple in Mumbai and the 2001 killing of producer Manmohan Desai’s contemporary, film financier and businessman Ramesh Taurani’s associate are stark examples, but the better-documented example of the period is the 2000 shooting of filmmaker Rakesh Roshan, who survived an attack outside his office. Rajiv Rai who survived an attack in 1997 and left India, Mukesh Duggal – who was killed in 1997, Ajit Dewani (Manisha Koirala’s secretary, killed in 2001), alongside past or reported extortion threats/calls targeting stars like Shah Rukh Khan, Arijit Singh, Sonu Nigam, Mahesh Bhatt, and Govinda are other examples of Bollywood’s uncomfortable tryst with the underworld over the years..

Bollywood’s relationship with the underworld was never simple. It has always been an industry navigating competing pressures, financial vulnerabilities and the allure of proximity to powerful people. While for gangsters, a photograph with a film star, an association with a successful production or an appearance at a high-profile gathering could become a symbol of status, on the other hand, for celebrities, even an unwanted association could carry reputational risks, while a direct threat could endanger their families, employees and professional lives – it became a relationship defined by fundamental imbalance.

However, by the early 2000s, as India’s film-financing ecosystem became more formalised and law enforcement intensified its scrutiny of criminal networks, the old relationships changed. In 2001, the Indian government granted the film industry official industry status, and helped create a framework for more official bankrolling. This did not eliminate criminal influence, but it marked an important shift in how the business could raise money.

Mumbai’s underworld has undergone substantial changes over the decades. Dawood Ibrahim and the D-Company became emblematic of the era when organised crime was widely discussed in connection with film financing, extortion and allegedly influences the movie-making business. In contemporary times, the Lawrence Bishnoi gang has emerged as a prominent name linked to multiple criminal cases, including threats to celebrities and other prominent figures.

The killing of former Maharashtra minister Baba Siddique in 2024 and the shooting outside actor Salman Khan’s Bandra residence earlier that year brought the issue into sharp focus. The Salman Khan case carried particular significance because Bishnoi had publicly expressed hostility towards the actor in connection with the blackbuck hunting case, invoking the Bishnoi community’s reverence for the animal.

Now, the attack involving Tiger Shroff arrives against a backdrop in which threats to celebrities have become a serious public-safety concern. For a celebrity, fame is both a professional asset and a security challenge. Homes, gyms, restaurants and familiar public venues can become predictable parts of a daily routine. The same visibility that helps build a star’s brand can also make their movements easier to track.

It would be simplistic to suggest that contemporary Bollywood is the same industry that existed in the 1990s. Film financing has evolved, corporate studios have grown, and digital platforms have transformed distribution and audience engagement. The industry is no longer dependent on the same informal networks that once shaped parts of its business. Yet the persistence of threats and shootings suggests that professionalisation has not made the industry immune to organised crime.

The reasons are not difficult to understand. Bollywood is a high-visibility business where reputations, relationships and public perception carry enormous value. Threatening a prominent actor can attract national attention, while an alleged attack can generate fear far beyond the immediate victim. Criminal networks may seek to exploit that visibility to demonstrate reach, exert pressure or enhance their own notoriety.

The title of William Blake’s famous 1974 poem, The Tyger (a part of his Songs of Experience), evokes a creature of unsettling power and mystery. In Bollywood’s own encounter with organised crime, the temptation has often been to treat gangsters as similarly enigmatic figures. But the Tiger Shroff incident, if the allegations under investigation are established, should be understood as a serious public-safety concern – not another chapter in the romanticisation of Mumbai’s underworld.

Be it the shooting of Rakesh Roshan in 2000, the killing of Gulshan Kumar in 1997 and the threats and attacks that have surfaced over the years demonstrate that the consequences of criminal intimidation can be devastating. The recent cases involving Salman Khan, filmmaker Rohit Shetty and now Tiger Shroff have further underlined the continuing need for vigilance.

The industry cannot erase its past, nor can it pretend that fame provides an impenetrable shield. But it can refuse to romanticise the forces that have repeatedly sought to exploit its money, visibility and influence. may have escaped the firing incident physically unharmed, but the larger question is whether Bollywood, and the judicial system can ensure that the industry’s long, troubled history with organised crime does not keep repeating itself.