Ultra-woke singer and virtue signaler Chinmayi Sripaada who was in the spotlight owing to the #MeToo allegations against Vairamuthu has to be reminded of something today.
Earlier in the day on 16 June 2025, The Commune had reported how former Kalakshetra director Leela Samson made a Facebook post expressing her “regret” for “wrongly mentioning” a former student’s name in connection with a male faculty. She wrote that she regretted the error and would not make comments about the student in the future.
Background
Samson’s admission comes after nearly two years of controversy stemming from her initial post, which alleged misconduct by a male teacher — Hari Padman — and inadvertently drew a student, into a scandal that disrupted her life and career. The student later alleged that the mention of her name, and its subsequent circulation in media reports and social media, had caused immense distress, mental agony, and damage to her reputation.
This ‘regret’ post came after the dispute was resolved recently through a mediated settlement following both civil and criminal complaints. The dragging of the student into the issue prompted the filing of a civil suit and related criminal charges. During the subsequent mediation process, as told to The Commune, Leela Samson expressed regret for her actions and agreed to do whatever was needed to make amends. This included putting up a public post on Facebook as a form of apology. In exchange for this, the complainant agreed to withdraw both the civil suit and the criminal case, effectively putting the matter to rest.
Before making the Facebook post, however, Leela took careful measures to control its visibility. She removed nearly all her friends from her account — reducing their number from approximately 2,000 down to just 5 — ensuring that the message would reach a limited and carefully curated viewership. Furthermore, as requested by the complainant, Leela made the post visible to the public while retaining this small number of friends. This tactic meant that the majority of her friends, and even many of her previous social media connections, remained oblivious to its content. In this way, the defendant was able to fulfill the terms of the agreement without broadly disclosing the details or drawing significant attention from her social circle.
As per the settlement, Leela Samson is to pay a total sum of ₹8 lakhs in two instalments — half upon withdrawal of the civil suit and the rest upon submission of a consent affidavit in the quash petition. The complainant also agreed to pursue quash proceedings before the Madras High Court.
Kalakshetra Issue
The controversy resulted in large-scale student protests, the temporary closing down of the institution, and the arrest of Hari Padman, who was later released on bail after the police failed to submit a chargesheet within the mandated time frame. A First Information Report (FIR) was lodged against Leela Samson and four other individuals under Section 509 of the IPC (intent to insult a woman’s modesty).
The FIR alleged that Samson made unfounded and derogatory comments, adding to the mental agony faced by the student, and further fueling rumors about her character. The complainant stressed in her filing that there was “not even a shred of truth” to the comments made by Samson and that their publication had a profoundly harmful effect on her personal and academic future.
What Did Leela Samson Post?
The complainant was a dance intern at the Rukmini Devi College of Fine Arts (“RDCFA”) and has been associated with the institution for the past 7 years. The FIR states that the complaint pertains to the post made by Ms. Leela Samson, former director of the Kalakshetra Foundation on her Facebook profile in December 2022.
The post has been deleted but the complainant claims that it has brought ill repute to her name and upheaved her personal and academic life. She also accuses Samson of having written the post with a highly vindictive agenda.
The post made by Samson alleged that a male staff member indulged in acts of sexual harassment inside the campus. The alleged male staff member mentioned therein is one Mr. Haripadman who happened to be one of the complainant’s mentors and he had trained her for years together.
In the comments section of the now-deleted Facebook post made on 23 December 2022 by Leela Samson, the complainant says that various comments were made about the alleged misdemeanours committed by Mr. Haripadman and that what was particularly disconcerting was that her name was linked in an uncharitable manner with Mr. Haripadman in one of those comments on the Facebook post.
The comments said, “His victims are many. (Name hidden) had an abortion and wanted him to marry her. And so on. He had a mistress who is an intern – (name hidden) known to bully the younger students. Everyone knows. Junior students apparently ask the question – what do have to do to get a role in the concert section!”
The comment on the Facebook post mentions the complainant’s name (removed for anonymity), although misspelled makes an explicit reference to her and the FIR says that it has given rise to an immense upheaval of her personal and academic life. The contents of the comment, at first glance, besides being false and baseless, are patently derogatory, disparaging, and vituperative, which projects the complainant in an extremely disparaging manner, the FIR said.
The context, tone and tenor of Leela Samson’s post gives away that she had used the word “mistress” with a sexual connotation.
The reference to the complainant as a “mistress”, the FIR said, was an attack against her dignity and an affront to her modesty and as such attracts the provision of Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
The police subsequently closed the complaint against Samson. When the complainant asked for the reason, she was informed that Samson claimed “mistress” meant “ejamaani” (in Tamil ejamaani means a feudal landlady) in the context of the intern giving tuitions to Haripadman’s son. As Samson had already removed her post, the police found her explanation “satisfactory” and decided to close the case.
Where Does Chinmayi Come Into The Picture?
After Leela Samson made the Facebook post, instead of verifying the facts, Chinmayi amplified it (despite it being deleted) and supported Leela Samson’s narrative. She wrote, “Leela Samson’s post on a male staff member at Kalakshetra ‘known to be threatening and molesting minors’.
She also amplified it on X a month after Leela Samson made the Facebook post and deleted it. She wrote, “Please amplify. Leela Samson spoke about an alleged child sex offender in Kalakshetra. She described experiences of sexual assault and rape and then deleted the post and comments. Sex offenders going scot free in the Carnatic Music, Bharatnatyam space is not new.”
In a subsequent post, she shared the screenshot of Leela Samson’s deleted Facebook post. She wrote, “Here she directly alleges that a male member molests minors. I am not sure if an enquiry was conducted, suo motu cognisance taken. Is nobody worried?”
Chinmayi’s Uncritical Support For False Allegations Exposed
The old Facebook and X posts reveal Chinmayi Sripaada continued supporting Leela Samson’s narrative even after the post was deleted, raising serious questions about her judgment in this case. By amplifying unverified claims, she prioritized viral outrage over factual accuracy. She did not bother to call out Leela Samson for naming the student and calling her “mistress”.
Now when the article on Leela Samson’s “regret” was published by The Commune on X, a netizen challenged her, stating, “FYI @Chinmayi came in her support… Leela Samson has a case…”, Chinmayi retorted, “Chinmayi came to whose support please?”, disregarding the fact that her own words supported Samson’s false allegations — without verifying their authenticity.
Chinmayi’s own words have been presented here. Perhaps this will help her reflect on the very real consequences that can unfold when allegations are amplified without proper verification. While standing against injustice is commendable, true advocacy requires more than just enthusiasm—it demands responsibility, fact-checking, and accountability, especially when innocent individuals get caught in the crossfire.
Why was she so quick to endorse unverified claims? Why has there been no acknowledgment of the harm caused to those wrongly implicated? And why does her activism seem to apply only one-way accountability? Will she call out Leela Samson for falsely naming the victim?
If the goal is genuine justice rather than performative outrage, then self-reflection is just as important as calling out others. The movement deserves better than selective indignation—it deserves integrity.
Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.
