On 29 May 2025, MC Murugesan, the elder brother of ruling DMK MLA MC Shanmugaiah of Ottapidaram, was arrested in connection with a land dispute and harassment case, after a woman filed a complaint accusing him of threats and coercion.
The complaint was filed by Muthumadathi, a resident of Thapathi village, who alleged that Murugesan had confronted her and her husband, Marimuthu, while they were returning from a visit to Tiruchendur temple. According to her statement, the incident took place in Muthaiahpuram, where Murugesan allegedly pressured her to sell her 4.5-acre property in Ottapidaram at a reduced price — a deal she had reportedly refused multiple times in the past.
Based on her complaint, the Muthaiahpuram police registered a First Information Report (FIR) and took Murugesan into custody. He was later presented before a judicial magistrate and remanded to 14 days of judicial custody on Friday.
Police sources added that Murugesan, who was found unwell during a routine medical checkup, has been admitted to Thoothukudi Government Medical College Hospital under police surveillance.
Murugesan is known to be a real estate dealer, involved in acquiring land from farmers — allegedly for renewable energy projects. His political connection to the DMK MLA from Ottapidaram has drawn significant public attention to the case.
In a candid and explosive revelation, actress Surveen Chawla has spoken out about her harrowing experiences in the film industry, particularly involving casting couch incidents during her time working in the Tamil cinema industry.
Speaking during a recent podcast interview, the actress shared unsettling experiences from her early career, including a particularly troubling encounter with a National Award-winning Tamil film director. She recalled enduring an intense 12-hour-long screen test that left her feeling uncomfortable and exhausted.
She said, “I was handed a monologue in Tamil and had to perform it on camera. There were costume changes, multiple retakes, and look tests. I ended up returning to Mumbai with a high fever.”
A few days later, she received a call from someone associated with the director, who couldn’t speak Hindi or English and relied on a friend for communication. Surveen said she would call him more as a “pimp” than an assistant, hinting at ulterior motives when the director expressed interest in “taking care of her” in Mumbai.
She stated firmly, “It was clear what he was getting at. The person on the call never came to the point. And finally, I asked if sir wants to sleep with me? Literally in these words. I said sorry you are knocking at the wrong door. I am not here bartering myself in exchange for work.”
Chawla also criticized the persistence and arrogance of the filmmaker, who continued trying to involve her in a film project that never materialized. She pointed out how many of the films she turned down — due to such inappropriate advances — either failed to release or flopped badly.
“This hasn’t happened just once or twice — I’ve had this kind of experience around 20 times. And every single time, the project went nowhere,” she revealed.
In addition to discussing the casting couch, Surveen also highlighted the body shaming she faced, particularly in South Indian cinema. She was often told to gain weight to suit the regional aesthetic, and was criticized for her slim figure. “I was asked about my weight and even my chest size. I was told things like ‘nothing will move or bounce.’ There was zero subtlety. I always gave it back to them without hesitation,” she said.
#SurveenChawla, actress from #Rana Naidu, shared her casting couch experience involving a Tamil director who asked for her "commitment."
She revealed that both the director and the actors involved were National Award winners. pic.twitter.com/vQbbD3nfVK
— Movies4u Official (@Movies4u_Officl) May 31, 2025
Surveen’s bold testimony sheds light on the ongoing exploitation and toxic standards many women in the film industry continue to face, sparking renewed conversation on the need for accountability and change in Indian cinema.
In a disturbing incident from Kanyakumari district, police have arrested a Christian pastor, Kingsley Gilbert (45), for violently assaulting his three children, claiming they were possessed by Satan.
Kingsley Gilbert, a preacher living in a rented house in Pullathuvilai near Karungal, resides with his wife Sajini, their two sons (aged 8 and 6), and an 8-month-old daughter. Known for conducting sermons in local churches, Gilbert’s actions have shocked the community.
Two nights ago, neighbors heard prolonged screaming coming from the pastor’s home. Concerned by the disturbing noise, they tried to get the family’s attention by knocking on the door, but received no response. The incident was reported to the Karungal police, who arrived at the scene shortly afterward.
After repeated attempts, Gilbert eventually opened the door. Inside, police discovered a horrific scene, his children had been tied up with ropes and brutally beaten. One child, in particular, suffered severe injuries across the body, according to police sources.
Further investigation revealed that Gilbert would routinely lock the children inside the house while he went out to preach. On the day of the incident, the children had wandered off to a neighbor’s house to play. When Gilbert returned and couldn’t find them, he allegedly became convinced that “evil spirits” had entered them. In an attempt to “drive out the devil,” he took the children home and assaulted them.
Police have confirmed that Kingsley Gilbert was taken into custody, and a detailed investigation is ongoing.
Three recent judgments by the Bombay High Court have sparked national outrage—but beneath the surface lies a web of ideological influence and institutional power plays that demands urgent scrutiny.
This is not just about court orders. It’s a chilling exposé of how entrenched ideological ecosystems may be shaping critical decisions at the highest levels of India’s judiciary. Read on…
Case 1: The Case Of Khadija Sheikh & Anti-National Social Media Posts
On 27 May 2025, the Bombay High Court slammed Maharashtra Police and Sinhgad Academy for arresting and rusticating 19-year-old student Khadija Sheikh over an Instagram post with pro-Pakistan sentiments during Operation Sindoor.
Justices Gauri Godse and Somasekhar Sundaresan called the actions “shocking” and said, “She is no criminal.”
The Court noted Sheikh deleted the post and apologized, yet authorities pursued an FIR and rustication without due process. Ordering her release and reinstatement, the bench allowed her to sit for exams and warned police against harassment. “First inculcate some discipline in the institute,” the judges told college officials.
Case 2: The Yemeni Refugee
In another case, the Bombay High Court ordered the release of Mohammed Qassim Mohammed Al-Shibah, a Yemeni national claiming UNHCR refugee status, who had been detained at a police station since May 16 without due process. The court found the detention irregular and emphasized that fundamental rights to equality and life apply to all individuals, including non-citizens.
Who passed the order, you wonder? This order was passed by the bench of Justice Gauri Godse and Justice Somashekhar Sundaresan.
Case 3: Halting The Modi Govt Order Over Turkish Firm Celebi Amid Op Sindoor
In May 2025, Bombay High Court issued a temporary injunction preventing Mumbai International Airport Ltd (MIAL) from finalizing bids to replace Celebi Airport Services India Pvt Ltd, the Indian arm of a Turkey-based company, for ground and bridge handling services.
This decision came after the Bureau of Civil Aviation Security revoked Celebi’s security clearance, citing national security concerns due to Turkey’s support for Pakistan during recent hostilities.
Who passed this order? Well, this order too was passed by Justice Somashekhar Sundaresan.
Who Is Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan?
Justice Sundaresan’s appointment to the Bombay High Court was not without controversy. Initially recommended by the Supreme Court Collegium in February 2022, his elevation faced objections from the central government, which described him as a “highly biased opinionated person” due to his social media posts critical of government policies. The Intelligence Bureau had recommended against his candidature citing his overtly political social media posts.
Despite the government’s reservations, the Supreme Court Collegium stood by its recommendation, asserting that expressing views on social media does not disqualify a candidate from holding a constitutional office, provided the individual possesses competence, merit, and integrity. After nearly two years, the central government notified his appointment in November 2023.
Professional Background
Before his judicial appointment, Justice Sundaresan was a senior advocate specializing in financial sector regulation, competition law, company matters, and exchange controls – a prominent corporate lawyer and partner at J. Sagar Associates, where he led the firm’s securities law and financial regulatory practice. His core expertise lay in financial matters.
But what’s more concerning is his long-standing association with Oxfam India, a British-linked NGO. Sundaresan served on Oxfam India’s Board—a role often considered the strategic brain of any NGO, deeply involved in decision-making. This connection demands scrutiny given Oxfam’s controversial track record and ongoing investigations into FCRA violations and alleged foreign influence operations.
We have seen in the past that Oxfam receives funding from high-profile international entities such as George Soros’s Open Society Foundations, the Ford Foundation, and the Rockefeller Foundation. These associations have led to concerns that Oxfam operates with ideological backing from global power networks—prompting some to describe it as a foreign-influenced NGO with deep-state affiliations rather than a neutral humanitarian organization.
Oxfam has faced serious allegations in the past, including claims that it supplied arms to the LTTE during the Sri Lankan civil war. It has also been described by some intelligence analysts as “one of the most powerful and secretive British intelligence fronts operating under the guise of a non-governmental organization.” While these claims remain controversial, they have fueled longstanding suspicions about Oxfam’s true operational motives and international affiliations.
Oxfam India is currently under scrutiny for alleged financial irregularities and FCRA violations. The organization was raided by the CBI in 2022–23 as part of an ongoing investigation into suspected misuse of foreign funds and potential financial fraud. These developments have raised serious concerns about the NGO’s compliance with Indian laws and its sources of funding.
Oxfam India has been accused of violating provisions of the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA), including allegedly transferring funds to the Centre for Policy Research (CPR) in contravention of legal norms. CPR, a prominent Indian think tank, is headed by Yamini Aiyar, daughter of senior Congress leader Mani Shankar Aiyar. In light of these allegations, the Government of India suspended CPR’s FCRA license, citing concerns over unlawful foreign funding and regulatory breaches.
All of these developments unfolded while Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan was serving as a Board Member of Oxfam India. He was appointed to the board on 3 December 2011 and remained in that influential position for nearly 13 years, stepping down only in late 2023—shortly before his elevation to the Bombay High Court bench.
Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan has consistently expressed criticism of the Modi government. Notably, he was vocal in his opposition to the government’s demonetization policy, publicly questioning its rationale and impact.
In response to Aamir Khan’s 2015 statement about rising intolerance in India, Somasekhar Sundaresan publicly supported the actor’s views and even authored an article defending Khan’s right to express concern, aligning himself with the broader discourse on dissent and free speech.
On the recommendation of the Intelligence Bureau (IB), Twitter suspended his account. Due to these factors, the Modi government initially declined to appoint him as a judge. The standoff between the Supreme Court Collegium and the Modi government lasted for two years, but ultimately, the government relented under the collegium’s pressure and appointed him.
Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan was appointed as an Additional Judge of the Bombay High Court on 28 November 2023.
(This article is based on an X Thread By The Chronology)
Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.
Disclaimer: This article isn’t a debate over whether Shaivism or Vaishnavism is superior. It is a critique aimed at exposing the hypocrisy and sectarian bias of political fraud Kamal Haasan, who masks his divisive agenda behind the façade of cinema and rationalism.
Kamal Haasan, often celebrated as a “progressive” and “rationalist” icon in Tamil cinema, has long portrayed himself as an atheist who stands above religious divisions. Yet, a closer examination of his films reveals a disturbing pattern—a deliberate and systematic effort to demean Shaivite traditions while glorifying Vaishnavism, the sect of his own Iyengar Brahmin caste. This hypocrisy exposes not just personal bias but a calculated attempt to distort Hindu religious history and deepen sectarian divides.
The Historical Context: Shaivism Vs. Vaishnavism
Before the onset of foreign rule, Hinduism in India was never a rigid, monolithic structure—it thrived as a rich tapestry of diverse sects and spiritual paths. Among them were the Shaivites (worshippers of Shiva), Vaishnavites (worshippers of Vishnu), Shaaktas (devotees of Devi/Shakti), Kaumaras (followers of Murugan/Skanda), Ganapatyas (worshippers of Ganesha), and Sauryas (devotees of Surya, the Sun God). Rather than being fragmented or conflicting, these traditions were brought under a unifying philosophical umbrella known as the Shanmata, or the “Six-Fold Path.”
The Shanmata system, formalized by Adi Shankaracharya, was not merely a theological innovation but a visionary civilizational effort to maintain religious cohesion. It was founded on the profound Vedantic principle that all deities are expressions of the same supreme, formless reality—Para Brahman. Shankara’s goal was clear: to dissolve sectarian ego and foster unity among Hindus by emphasizing that these six deities were not rivals, but reflections of one divine source.
However, history records that theological rivalries did exist—particularly between Shaivites and Vaishnavites, each asserting the supremacy of their chosen deity. These doctrinal debates, though often philosophical, sometimes spilled into political patronage.
While many Hindu kings supported a wide array of temples and traditions, certain Chola monarchs, particularly those of the imperial period, were ardent Shaivites and commissioned grand temples dedicated to Lord Shiva. For instance, Raja Raja Chola I built the majestic Brihadeeswarar Temple in Thanjavur, consecrated to Lord Shiva as ‘Rajarajeswaram’. His son, Rajendra Chola I, furthered this Shaivite legacy with the construction of the Gangaikonda Cholapuram temple, another architectural marvel dedicated to Shiva.
However, the Cholas were not entirely sectarian in their religious patronage. Inscriptions show that they also contributed generously to Vaishnavite temples. Raja Raja Chola I and his queens donated lands and gold to the Srirangam Ranganathaswamy Temple, one of the most sacred Vaishnavite shrines. Kulothunga Chola I is noted for making extensive renovations to the same temple and for endowing the Tirumala Venkateswara Temple in Tirupati. Additionally, Rajadhiraja Chola II supported the construction and maintenance of Vishnu temples in and around Kanchipuram.
These examples indicate that while Shaivism was the state-supported religion under many Chola rulers, there was also significant royal patronage for Vaishnavism.
Parthasarathy Srinivasan Iyengar’s Venom
Kamal Haasan, born as Parthasarathy Srinivasan Iyengar, has repeatedly used his films to subtly—and at times blatantly—indulge in sectarian division to create confusion amongst the Hindu fold. While cloaked in intellectualism and rationalism, his scripts often betray an unmistakable bias: elevating his own Vaishnavite background while mocking or vilifying Shaivism and its associated symbols, rituals, and devotees.
Kamal’s films, particularly those where he had creative control, consistently follow a troubling trend. Let’s take a look at some of his films.
‘Anbe Sivam‘ (2003): The Villain As A Shiva Devotee
The antagonist, Kandasamy Padayatchi (played by Nasser), is depicted as a fanatical Shiva devotee, repeatedly chanting“தென்னாடுடைய சிவனே போற்றி“(“Praise to the Shiva of the Southern Land”).
Why was the villain specifically written as a Shiva worshipper? There is no narrative necessity—unless the intent was to associate Shaivism with villainy. Contrast this with Kamal’s own roles: When he plays a believer, it’s always as a devotee of Vishnu, Rama, or Hanuman (Vaishnavite deities).
‘Kaadhala Kaadhala‘ (1998): Mocking Lord Murugan
The film ridicules Lord Murugan through dream sequences where Kamal and Prabhudeva dress as the god for comedic effect. The script mocks Murugan’s two consorts (Valli and Deivanai), turning a sacred aspect of Shaivite theology into a cheap joke. In no film of his, Kamal had mocked Vishnu’s three consorts (Lakshmi, Bhudevi, Niladevi)? Never.
‘Pammal K. Sambandam‘ (2002): Portraying Lord Shiva As A Comic Character
Kamal’s character in this movie is a Hanuman devotee (associated with Vaishnavism), while his family members are shown as Shiva worshippers with Vibhuti marks. In one scene, Kamal dresses as Lord Shiva for a comedy scene in a film, ridiculing the deity – where he is seen blowing bubbles with his bubblegum, ridiculing and caricaturing Lord Shiva as if he was as a joke.
‘Dasavathaaram‘ (2008): Rewriting History To Vilify Shaivites
The film’s opening depicts King Kulothunga Chola II (a Shaivite), played by actor Napoleon, as a tyrant who orders the removal of a Vishnu idol from the Chidambaram temple. Kamal’s character, Rangarajan Nambi, a hardcore Vaishnavite, is tied to the idol and thrown into the sea—a fabricated, melodramatic scene.
Earlier in the film, there’s a prolonged exchange between Rangarajan Nambi and Kulothunga Chola II, during which Kamal Haasan’s dialogues are carefully constructed to subtly—but unmistakably—promote the theological superiority of Vaishnavism over Shaivism. But the narrative doesn’t stop at philosophical one-upmanship. Kamal’s contempt for Shaivism becomes glaringly evident in a disturbing scene where a young Shaivite child throws a stone at Rangarajan Nambi. It strikes his forehead, and the blood that trickles down forms a red vertical line.
The symbolism is chillingly deliberate: the message being that even a child raised in a Shaivite household is indoctrinated with hatred. It’s not just a cinematic choice—it’s a sectarian statement disguised as storytelling.
But what’s the historical truth? Inscriptions confirm that the Chidambaram Nataraja temple was always a Shaivite stronghold. Ramanujar (a Vaishnava saint) allegedly tried to install a Vishnu idol, leading to its removal by the Shaivite king (sometimes referred to as Kirumikanda Chola). Kamal reversed the narrative to paint Vaishnavites as victims.
Saket Ram Iyengar, an archaeologist, suffers a devastating personal loss during the Calcutta Riots triggered by Mohammed Ali Jinnah’s call for Direct Action Day. Overwhelmed by grief and rage, he is drawn into the ideology of Hindutva, coming to believe that Mahatma Gandhi’s policy of Muslim appeasement is the root cause of India’s communal strife. Abandoning his second wife and family, he renounces worldly life and takes sannyasa in Kashi—notably, through Shaivite rituals, conducted by Shaivite priests and a guru, despite being an Iyengar, a staunch Vaishnavite by birth.
Assuming the alias ‘Bhairav’—a fierce aspect of Lord Shiva—he roams Delhi with the intention of assassinating Gandhi. In a moment of clarity, Saket attempts to confess his change of heart, only to witness Gandhi being assassinated by Nathuram Godse.
‘Panchathanthiram’ (2002): Naming The Negative Lady Character ‘Maragadhavalli‘
In this comedy film, Ramya Krishnan’s character—a morally grey, gold-digging woman—is named “Maragadhavalli“, a traditional name associated with Goddess Parvati (a Shaivite deity). “Maragathavalli” in Tamil means “emerald vine” or “green vine”. In the Tamil Hindu iconography, Goddess Parvati is depicted in green colour.
Meanwhile, Kamal’s character is simply “Ram“, and Simran’s character is “Mythili” as Mythili is another name for Ma Sita. Why is the negative character given a Shaivite name while the protagonists bear Vaishnava names? The symbolism is nothing but deliberate.
‘Vasool Raja MBBS’ (2004):
In a scene, Kamal’s character derisively calls his roommate “Sambu Mavan”—a nickname referencing Lord Murugan (also called Sambu). Kamal also tries to pass off a new phrase “Anbe Venkatachalam“. When the roommate corrects him, saying“Isn’t it Anbe Sivam?“, Kamal dismissively replies,“I have already told it, let this be a new one.”
Thisisn’t just comedy—it’s a deliberate dig at Shaivite devotion. Kamal’s character refuses to acknowledge Anbe Sivam (a film where he himself played a role).
‘Papanasam’ (2015): ‘Suyambulingam’ Vs. ‘Perumal’—Criminal Vs. Truth-Teller
The film’s antagonist, who hides a murder and turns into a criminal, is named “Suyambulingam”—a classic Shaivite name (referring to Lord Shiva as Swayambhu Lingam). Meanwhile, the character who ultimately confesses the truth is named “Perumal”—a Vaishnava name for Lord Vishnu. The message is clear: The Shaivite-named character is deceitful, while the Vaishnava-named character upholds truth. This is not a coincidence—it’s calculated symbolism.
Vishwaroopam 2: ‘Eshwar’ Iyer Is A Traitor Helping Terrorists
Kamal who plays the role of Wisam Ahmad Kashmiri faces resistance from his superior Eshwar Iyer (Anant Mahadevan) who is revealed to be a traitor working for Omar Qureshi, the main antagonist.
The Hypocrisy Of A “Fake Atheist”
Kamal Haasan’s public persona is that of a rationalist who rejects God, yet his films betray a deep-seated religious bias:
When mocking faith, he targets only Shaivite deities
When portraying devotion, he exclusively elevates Vaishnava figures (Vishnu, Rama, Krishna, Hanuman).
This selective atheism proves he is not a true skeptic but a sectarian propagandist.
Kamal’s long-time collaborator, Crazy Mohan (also a Vaishnava Brahmin), contributed to scripts reinforcing this bias. Directors like Sundar C and Singeetam Srinivasa Rao acted as “yes-men,” executing Kamal’s vision without question. After gaining creative control, Kamal weaponized cinema to push his sectarian agenda.
Kamal Haasan’s films are not just entertainment—they are tools of religious manipulation. By vilifying Shaivism and glorifying Vaishnavism, he fans the flames of an ancient sectarian divide. If he were truly an atheist, he would critique all gods of all religions equally. Instead, he protects his own tradition while attacking others.
Vallavaraayan is a political writer.
Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.
Son-in-law of ‘Lottery’ Martin and self-styled ‘political strategist’ Aadhav Arjuna who is currently Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) Election Management General Secretary has once again sparked controversy, this time by making sarcastic remarks about AIADMK General Secretary and Leader of the Opposition, Edappadi K. Palaniswami.
In what seems like a deliberately leaked video by the TVK which has since gone viral, Aadhav Arjuna is seen walking alongside TVK General Secretary Bussy Anand, taking a dig at the AIADMK leader.
The video was reportedly taken during an event organized by actor-turned-politician Vijay, who hosted a felicitation ceremony at a private hotel near Mamallapuram to honor top-performing students in the Class 10 and +2 public exams. Ahead of the event, TVK’s General Secretary Bussy Anand and Aadhav Arjuna had visited the hotel to inspect arrangements.
In the widely circulated clip, Arjuna is seen joking with Anand, saying, “It seems the BJP will drop the AIADMK from the alliance. Forming an alliance with them might bring some alliance…” He laughs and adds, “At least Annamalai managed to field 10 candidates and contest the election getting 18% votes. But no one is willing to join an alliance based on trust in Edappadi.”
Aadhav Arjuna can be heard addressing both BJP leader Annamalai and Edappadi Palaniswami in singular.
'எடப்பாடியை நம்பி எவனும் கூட்டணிக்கு வரமாதிரி தெரியல'
Karnataka Minister for Kannada and Culture, Shivaraj Tangadagi, on 30 May 2025 confirmed that actor Kamal Haasan’s upcoming film Thug Life will be banned in the state unless the actor issues a public apology for his recent remark about the Kannada language.
Haasan, while promoting Thug Life, reportedly claimed that “Kannada is born out of Tamil,” sparking widespread outrage among pro-Kannada groups, cultural organisations, and political leaders across party lines. The Karnataka Film Chamber of Commerce (KFCC) echoed the sentiment and demanded an apology from the veteran actor by 30 May 2025.
“I have written a letter. After that, the film chamber of commerce has also taken a good decision and held a press meet yesterday saying that if he doesn’t apologise in two days his film will be banned. I extend my compliments to the film chamber of commerce as the Minister for Kannada and Culture,” said Minister Tangadagi.
Addressing reporters in Bengaluru, Tangadagi stated unequivocally, “We will not allow it, if he doesn’t apologise. He should apologise. Any light comment against Kannada will not be tolerated. If he doesn’t apologise, we will take our decision.”
Asked directly whether Haasan’s films would be banned without an apology, Tangadagi responded, “Yes.”
The minister revealed that he had personally spoken to Kannada film star Shivarajkumar about the controversy and urged him to convey the seriousness of the matter to Haasan. “Dr Rajkumar and family have worked a lot for Kannada cause, likewise Kannadaigas have also nurtured them. As a senior actor, you (Shivarajkumar) make him (Kamal Hassan) understand. I told him on the stage. We cannot tolerate it,” he said.
Tangadagi referenced earlier incidents, including a controversy involving singer Sonu Nigam, to underline that disparaging comments about Kannada by outsiders would not be tolerated. “We want to see Kamal Haasan as an actor, but not as an actor limited to one language, because he has acted in all languages. Respecting actors is our duty, but when it comes to language, whoever it is—language is first, rest all later. So there is no question of compromise,” he said.
KFCC president M Narasimhalu confirmed that the ban decision had the support of exhibitors and distributors, who had voluntarily decided not to screen Thug Life if an apology wasn’t issued. “The industry is with Kannada organisations and the people,” Narasimhalu said.
He clarified that no legal action was being taken, but that the exhibitors and distributors had resolved to support the Kannada cause. “Political leaders have also condemned his statement—whether those in the government or those from the opposition. We are not taking any action legally, but the exhibitors and distributors themselves are saying that they will not screen the movie and will screen other films. They have taken the decision by themselves. We are not saying don’t release or ban,” he added.
The KFCC is reportedly in touch with the South Indian Film Chamber of Commerce, and its president Ravi Kottarakara is in communication with Haasan. Narasimhalu noted that Haasan might be refusing to apologise due to political reasons but expressed hope that clarity would emerge soon. “During such incidents, star actors in the past have apologised, such things have happened, nothing new,” he added.
Former KFCC president Sa Ra Govindu said, “We have no sympathy for Kamal Haasan. If he does not issue a public apology today or tomorrow, we will support Kannada activists and will protest fiercely. Under no circumstances will we allow the film’s release unless he apologises publicly.”
At a media interaction in Bengaluru on Friday, 30 May 2025, Govindu announced that Thug Life would be banned in Karnataka due to Haasan’s refusal to apologise. “When there is pressure, I have to do. Even Karnataka Rakshana Vedike were present; whatever they say, we should do it. Even they would speak about it. Definitely, there is no ‘Sorry’ term being specified anywhere by Kamal Hassan,” he said. “We will surely not release the film. We [KFCC] will stand with Rakshina Vedike and other Kannada organisations,” he added.
Kamal Haasan Chennai Press Meet
In Chennai, Kamal Haasan has refused to apologise. “This is a democratic country. I believe in law and justice. I believe love will always triumph. My love for Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, and Kerala is true. Nobody will suspect it except those who have an agenda. I have been threatened before,” he said.
“If I am wrong, I will apologise. If I am not, then I won’t,” Haasan said.
In an earlier interview, Haasan attempted to clarify his comments: “I think what I said was said with a lot of love. Historians have taught me the language history…I didn’t mean anything. And, let me tell you, Tamil Nadu is a place which has been open. I don’t say there is no other state like this. But a very rare state where a Menon (MG Ramachandran) has been our Chief Minister…a Reddy (Omandur Ramasamy Reddiyar) has been our Chief Minister, a Tamilian (M Karunanidhi) has been our Chief Minister and then a Kannadiga Iyengar has been our CM from Mandya,” Haasan said, as quoted by PTI.
— Vishwatma 🇮🇳 ( மோடியின் குடும்பம் ) (@HLKodo) May 28, 2025
Directed by Mani Ratnam, Thug Life stars Kamal Haasan, Trisha Krishnan, Silambarasan TR, and a host of others including Abhirami, Sanya Malhotra, Ashok Selvan, Aishwarya Lekshmi, Joju George, Nassar, Ali Fazal, Pankaj Tripathi, Rohit Saraf, and Vaiyapuri.
Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.
The Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchai Yojana (PMKSY) 2.0 was launched by Prime Minister Narendra Modi to enhance access to water on farmlands, expand cultivable area under assured irrigation and also improve on-farm water use efficiency.
The PMKSY scheme, promoting the use of contour trench technology, has met with considerable success and is yielding considerable results in water conservation as well as groundwater recharge.
The results are visible in at least three villages of Neemuch district — Danta, Kundaliya and Bhagori villages, and this has started bringing dramatic changes in the livelihood of farmers. Earlier, the rainwater used to flow away, but now it is getting absorbed into the ground through contour trenching.
This has not only increased the water level but has also created a proper system of irrigation in the fields. Many villagers spoke to IANS about the changing agricultural practices and how this has helped them overcome the shortage of water and still make up for a good agricultural yield. Farmer Mukesh Dhangar said that due to the construction of the contour trench, the water level in the fields has increased, and now three to four crops are grown here.
“Earlier, farming was affected due to a lack of water, but now water is being collected through the farm pond and trenches. This scheme is proving to be a boon for farmers,” he said. Farmer Dinesh Nagda said, “With this scheme, water is available for 12 months. Earlier, hand pumps used to dry up, now they remain operational till the rains.”
Babu Singh Chauhan of village Vasaniya and Sarpanch representative Chetan Gurjar also praised the scheme and said that it has made the entire Panchayat area water rich. Neemuch District Panchayat Chief Executive Officer Aman Vaishnav said that the barren land is also becoming green now.
“Seeds of plants like acacia and khair are being sprinkled around the contour trench to increase greenery in a natural way,” he informed. Another big benefit of the project is that it has resolved the drinking water crisis, especially in summer. Water collects in structures like trenches and check dams and maintains the groundwater level, due to which the villagers are able to get water even in summer.
–IANS
Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.
An election worker in South Korea was apprehended this week after allegedly casting an early vote for the June 3 presidential election on her husband’s behalf, police said on Friday. The woman was identified as a contract employee for Seoul’s Gangnam district office who was appointed by the National Election Commission (NEC) to help check voters’ IDs during the two-day early voting on Thursday and Friday, according to Suseo Police Station.
Police detained the woman without a warrant Thursday, about half an hour after they received a call that someone had voted twice at a polling station in Gangnam’s Daechi 2-dong neighbourhood. She is being questioned on suspicion of casting a ballot using her husband’s ID before casting her own ballot several hours later. The woman reportedly admitted to all charges but refused to disclose a motive. Both the Gangnam district office and the NEC said they have relieved her of her duties. The NEC also filed a complaint against the woman with the police while requesting an investigation into her husband’s possible involvement.
“A vote by proxy by an election worker who should strictly and fairly oversee the presidential election is a very serious election crime that brutally tramples on the people’s trust in election administration,” the commission said.
The woman’s ballots cannot be nullified as they have already been placed inside ballot boxes, a commission official said. The vote count will proceed normally. In light of this and other incidents, the conservative People Power Party (PPP) on Friday lambasted the poor management in early voting elections, demanding the chief of the election watchdog apologise, Yonhap news agency reported. Kim Moon-soo, the party’s presidential candidate, denounced the NEC after meeting with reporters in Jecheon, North Chungcheong Province, saying the institution must “wake up” and undergo a “sweeping overhaul.”
“Why is the NEC still not fixing these problems, after going through many similar cases in the past, like the basket election incident?” he asked, referring to the controversy over the transportation of ballot papers from Covid-19 patients in plastic baskets during the early voting for the 2022 presidential election. Rep. Kim Yong-tae, the party’s interim leader, also blamed the NEC for its inadequate election management while referring to a series of incidents that took place during the early voting. Voters reportedly went out to eat while carrying ballot papers in Sinchon, western Seoul, on Thursday.
“We will review revising the Public Official Election Act to have election officials sign the early-voting ballot papers,” Kim said. He also demanded a comprehensive inspection and overhaul of all early-voting sites, and said those responsible for the incidents must be duly reprimanded.
“The Chairman of the NEC should stand before the people himself and sincerely apologise,” Kim added. Rep. Shin Dong-uk, the PPP’s spokesperson, said the liberal Democratic Party (DP) has not been sufficiently critical of the NEC. “The DP has collected a lot of votes in early voting and that party’s silence is even more irresponsible (than the NEC’s mishaps),” Shin said. “Is the DP the defender of a rigged election?”
–IANS
Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.
Russia on Friday rubbished “fake reports” which cited that it is broadening economic ties with Pakistan, especially by jointly setting up steel mills in Karachi. Pakistani media recently reported that Moscow and Islamabad are working on expanding industrial collaboration by establishing new steel mills in the country in a bid to revive the cooperation witnessed between the two countries in the 1970s when the Soviet Union designed and funded Pakistan Steel Mills (PSM).
The idea, reported Pakistani media, was discussed during a meeting between Haroon Akhtar Khan, a Special Assistant to Pakistan’s Prime Minister, and Moscow’s representative Denis Nazaroof held in Islamabad on May 13. “The two officials engaged in extensive talks on the prospect of collaboration and agreed to form a joint working group to facilitate the establishment of a steel mill in Karachi,” The Express Tribune reported after the meeting.
“Pakistan is a secure and thriving hub for investment and the international community has recognised its potential,” Khan was quoted as saying during the interaction. The reports triggered concerns and also raised doubts considering that cash-strapped Pakistan’s economy continues to survive on bailout packages provided by the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Sources in Moscow admitted negotiations taking place on the issue but slammed reports which claimed that a “multibillion dollar contract” has been signed between the two countries.
They reckoned that by manufacturing fake and “completely fabricated” reports, Pakistan has made yet another failed attempt to dent the time-tested India-Russia Special and Privileged Strategic Partnership which has grown even stronger during Operation Sindoor targetting terror infrastructure deep inside Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK), earlier this month.
“An exaggerated news from someone who wants to derail the relationship for a sensational reason,” said a senior Russian government official on Friday when asked about his response to Pakistani media reports. As the Indian Armed Forces successfully retaliated and also inflicted significant losses on Pakistan, the Russian-made air defence missile system S-400 was credited with shooting down several incoming missiles from across the border.
At the same time, jointly developed with Russia and now largely manufactured in India, the BrahMos supersonic cruise missiles were used to strike high-value targets in Pakistan. In an exclusive interview with IANS, Russian Ambassador to India Denis Alipov had lauded Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s leadership while also praising New Delhi for identifying, tracking and punishing the culprits behind the heinous April 22 Pahalgam terror attack which resulted in the death of 26 innocent civilians.
Russian President Vladimir Putin, who stated in his phone conversation with Prime Minister Narendra Modi earlier this month that Moscow expects that the culprits behind the Pahalgam attack “will be identified, tracked and punished”, is also slated to visit India, this year. “I don’t think there is anybody, anywhere in the world that doubts the credentials of Prime Minister Modi. His strong leadership is steering the country to global prominence. Both India and Russia stand for a multipolar world order without any global power or a group of countries dominating that order. They stand for an equal international relationship. This has been reinstated in the conversation President Vladimir Putin and Prime Minister Modi had on May 5,” Alipov told IANS on Wednesday.
–IANS
Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.
How Kamal Haasan Tried To Insult Shaivites On Screen While Glorifying His Own Iyengar Caste
Disclaimer: This article isn’t a debate over whether Shaivism or Vaishnavism is superior. It is a critique aimed at exposing the hypocrisy and sectarian bias of political fraud Kamal Haasan, who masks his divisive agenda behind the façade of cinema and rationalism.
Kamal Haasan, often celebrated as a “progressive” and “rationalist” icon in Tamil cinema, has long portrayed himself as an atheist who stands above religious divisions. Yet, a closer examination of his films reveals a disturbing pattern—a deliberate and systematic effort to demean Shaivite traditions while glorifying Vaishnavism, the sect of his own Iyengar Brahmin caste. This hypocrisy exposes not just personal bias but a calculated attempt to distort Hindu religious history and deepen sectarian divides.
The Historical Context: Shaivism Vs. Vaishnavism
Before the onset of foreign rule, Hinduism in India was never a rigid, monolithic structure—it thrived as a rich tapestry of diverse sects and spiritual paths. Among them were the Shaivites (worshippers of Shiva), Vaishnavites (worshippers of Vishnu), Shaaktas (devotees of Devi/Shakti), Kaumaras (followers of Murugan/Skanda), Ganapatyas (worshippers of Ganesha), and Sauryas (devotees of Surya, the Sun God). Rather than being fragmented or conflicting, these traditions were brought under a unifying philosophical umbrella known as the Shanmata, or the “Six-Fold Path.”
The Shanmata system, formalized by Adi Shankaracharya, was not merely a theological innovation but a visionary civilizational effort to maintain religious cohesion. It was founded on the profound Vedantic principle that all deities are expressions of the same supreme, formless reality—Para Brahman. Shankara’s goal was clear: to dissolve sectarian ego and foster unity among Hindus by emphasizing that these six deities were not rivals, but reflections of one divine source.
However, history records that theological rivalries did exist—particularly between Shaivites and Vaishnavites, each asserting the supremacy of their chosen deity. These doctrinal debates, though often philosophical, sometimes spilled into political patronage.
While many Hindu kings supported a wide array of temples and traditions, certain Chola monarchs, particularly those of the imperial period, were ardent Shaivites and commissioned grand temples dedicated to Lord Shiva. For instance, Raja Raja Chola I built the majestic Brihadeeswarar Temple in Thanjavur, consecrated to Lord Shiva as ‘Rajarajeswaram’. His son, Rajendra Chola I, furthered this Shaivite legacy with the construction of the Gangaikonda Cholapuram temple, another architectural marvel dedicated to Shiva.
However, the Cholas were not entirely sectarian in their religious patronage. Inscriptions show that they also contributed generously to Vaishnavite temples. Raja Raja Chola I and his queens donated lands and gold to the Srirangam Ranganathaswamy Temple, one of the most sacred Vaishnavite shrines. Kulothunga Chola I is noted for making extensive renovations to the same temple and for endowing the Tirumala Venkateswara Temple in Tirupati. Additionally, Rajadhiraja Chola II supported the construction and maintenance of Vishnu temples in and around Kanchipuram.
These examples indicate that while Shaivism was the state-supported religion under many Chola rulers, there was also significant royal patronage for Vaishnavism.
Parthasarathy Srinivasan Iyengar’s Venom
Kamal Haasan, born as Parthasarathy Srinivasan Iyengar, has repeatedly used his films to subtly—and at times blatantly—indulge in sectarian division to create confusion amongst the Hindu fold. While cloaked in intellectualism and rationalism, his scripts often betray an unmistakable bias: elevating his own Vaishnavite background while mocking or vilifying Shaivism and its associated symbols, rituals, and devotees.
Kamal’s films, particularly those where he had creative control, consistently follow a troubling trend. Let’s take a look at some of his films.
‘Anbe Sivam‘ (2003): The Villain As A Shiva Devotee
The antagonist, Kandasamy Padayatchi (played by Nasser), is depicted as a fanatical Shiva devotee, repeatedly chanting “தென்னாடுடைய சிவனே போற்றி“ (“Praise to the Shiva of the Southern Land”).
Why was the villain specifically written as a Shiva worshipper? There is no narrative necessity—unless the intent was to associate Shaivism with villainy. Contrast this with Kamal’s own roles: When he plays a believer, it’s always as a devotee of Vishnu, Rama, or Hanuman (Vaishnavite deities).
‘Kaadhala Kaadhala‘ (1998): Mocking Lord Murugan
The film ridicules Lord Murugan through dream sequences where Kamal and Prabhudeva dress as the god for comedic effect. The script mocks Murugan’s two consorts (Valli and Deivanai), turning a sacred aspect of Shaivite theology into a cheap joke. In no film of his, Kamal had mocked Vishnu’s three consorts (Lakshmi, Bhudevi, Niladevi)? Never.
‘Pammal K. Sambandam‘ (2002): Portraying Lord Shiva As A Comic Character
Kamal’s character in this movie is a Hanuman devotee (associated with Vaishnavism), while his family members are shown as Shiva worshippers with Vibhuti marks. In one scene, Kamal dresses as Lord Shiva for a comedy scene in a film, ridiculing the deity – where he is seen blowing bubbles with his bubblegum, ridiculing and caricaturing Lord Shiva as if he was as a joke.
‘Dasavathaaram‘ (2008): Rewriting History To Vilify Shaivites
The film’s opening depicts King Kulothunga Chola II (a Shaivite), played by actor Napoleon, as a tyrant who orders the removal of a Vishnu idol from the Chidambaram temple. Kamal’s character, Rangarajan Nambi, a hardcore Vaishnavite, is tied to the idol and thrown into the sea—a fabricated, melodramatic scene.
Earlier in the film, there’s a prolonged exchange between Rangarajan Nambi and Kulothunga Chola II, during which Kamal Haasan’s dialogues are carefully constructed to subtly—but unmistakably—promote the theological superiority of Vaishnavism over Shaivism. But the narrative doesn’t stop at philosophical one-upmanship. Kamal’s contempt for Shaivism becomes glaringly evident in a disturbing scene where a young Shaivite child throws a stone at Rangarajan Nambi. It strikes his forehead, and the blood that trickles down forms a red vertical line.
The symbolism is chillingly deliberate: the message being that even a child raised in a Shaivite household is indoctrinated with hatred. It’s not just a cinematic choice—it’s a sectarian statement disguised as storytelling.
But what’s the historical truth? Inscriptions confirm that the Chidambaram Nataraja temple was always a Shaivite stronghold. Ramanujar (a Vaishnava saint) allegedly tried to install a Vishnu idol, leading to its removal by the Shaivite king (sometimes referred to as Kirumikanda Chola). Kamal reversed the narrative to paint Vaishnavites as victims.
‘Hey Ram’ (2000): Sober ‘Saket Ram’ Becomes Bigoted ‘Bhairav’ To Kill Gandhi
Saket Ram Iyengar, an archaeologist, suffers a devastating personal loss during the Calcutta Riots triggered by Mohammed Ali Jinnah’s call for Direct Action Day. Overwhelmed by grief and rage, he is drawn into the ideology of Hindutva, coming to believe that Mahatma Gandhi’s policy of Muslim appeasement is the root cause of India’s communal strife. Abandoning his second wife and family, he renounces worldly life and takes sannyasa in Kashi—notably, through Shaivite rituals, conducted by Shaivite priests and a guru, despite being an Iyengar, a staunch Vaishnavite by birth.
Assuming the alias ‘Bhairav’—a fierce aspect of Lord Shiva—he roams Delhi with the intention of assassinating Gandhi. In a moment of clarity, Saket attempts to confess his change of heart, only to witness Gandhi being assassinated by Nathuram Godse.
‘Panchathanthiram’ (2002): Naming The Negative Lady Character ‘Maragadhavalli‘
In this comedy film, Ramya Krishnan’s character—a morally grey, gold-digging woman—is named “Maragadhavalli“, a traditional name associated with Goddess Parvati (a Shaivite deity). “Maragathavalli” in Tamil means “emerald vine” or “green vine”. In the Tamil Hindu iconography, Goddess Parvati is depicted in green colour.
Meanwhile, Kamal’s character is simply “Ram“, and Simran’s character is “Mythili” as Mythili is another name for Ma Sita. Why is the negative character given a Shaivite name while the protagonists bear Vaishnava names? The symbolism is nothing but deliberate.
‘Vasool Raja MBBS’ (2004):
In a scene, Kamal’s character derisively calls his roommate “Sambu Mavan”—a nickname referencing Lord Murugan (also called Sambu). Kamal also tries to pass off a new phrase “Anbe Venkatachalam“. When the roommate corrects him, saying “Isn’t it Anbe Sivam?“, Kamal dismissively replies, “I have already told it, let this be a new one.”
This isn’t just comedy—it’s a deliberate dig at Shaivite devotion. Kamal’s character refuses to acknowledge Anbe Sivam (a film where he himself played a role).
‘Papanasam’ (2015): ‘Suyambulingam’ Vs. ‘Perumal’—Criminal Vs. Truth-Teller
The film’s antagonist, who hides a murder and turns into a criminal, is named “Suyambulingam”—a classic Shaivite name (referring to Lord Shiva as Swayambhu Lingam). Meanwhile, the character who ultimately confesses the truth is named “Perumal”—a Vaishnava name for Lord Vishnu. The message is clear: The Shaivite-named character is deceitful, while the Vaishnava-named character upholds truth. This is not a coincidence—it’s calculated symbolism.
Vishwaroopam 2: ‘Eshwar’ Iyer Is A Traitor Helping Terrorists
Kamal who plays the role of Wisam Ahmad Kashmiri faces resistance from his superior Eshwar Iyer (Anant Mahadevan) who is revealed to be a traitor working for Omar Qureshi, the main antagonist.
The Hypocrisy Of A “Fake Atheist”
Kamal Haasan’s public persona is that of a rationalist who rejects God, yet his films betray a deep-seated religious bias:
This selective atheism proves he is not a true skeptic but a sectarian propagandist.
Kamal’s long-time collaborator, Crazy Mohan (also a Vaishnava Brahmin), contributed to scripts reinforcing this bias. Directors like Sundar C and Singeetam Srinivasa Rao acted as “yes-men,” executing Kamal’s vision without question. After gaining creative control, Kamal weaponized cinema to push his sectarian agenda.
Kamal Haasan’s films are not just entertainment—they are tools of religious manipulation. By vilifying Shaivism and glorifying Vaishnavism, he fans the flames of an ancient sectarian divide. If he were truly an atheist, he would critique all gods of all religions equally. Instead, he protects his own tradition while attacking others.
Vallavaraayan is a political writer.
Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.