Chennai: Tamil actor Kasturi Shankar has applied for anticipatory bail in the Madras High Court following a defamation case against her for remarks about the Telugu-speaking community in Tamil Nadu.
Justice Anand Venkatesh of the Madras High Court is scheduled to hear her plea on Tuesday, November 12.
Kasturi’s petition asserts that the defamation case was filed against her with malicious intent.
The actor made the remarks while participating in a protest organised by the Hindu Makkal Katchi in Chennai, which was held in support of Brahmins on November 3 (Sunday).
During her speech, she criticised the Telugu-speaking community in Tamil Nadu, prompting several complaints against her throughout the state. Tamil Nadu Police have registered multiple cases in various police stations.
When police went to serve her notice at her residence in Chennai, they found the house locked, and her phone was switched off.
Although Kasturi later apologised for her comments, complaints continued to be filed across the state.
Kasturi, who campaigned extensively for the BJP in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, was distanced by the Tamil Nadu BJP, which condemned her statements.
In response to the backlash, Kasturi issued a clarification, asserting that her comments were misinterpreted and that negative propaganda was being spread against her.
She claimed that her remarks were intended to expose the hypocrisy and double standards of the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK).
According to Kasturi, her remarks referenced a specific subset of workers who accompanied Telugu rulers to Tamil Nadu centuries ago and later assumed Tamil identities.
She claimed her comments were twisted to imply she had broadly attacked the Telugu community, which she denied, emphasizing: “This has nothing to do with Telugu pride or Telugu people from Andhra or Telangana. This is about a small, historically documented group that assumed Tamil identities but now, paradoxically, seeks to define what it means to be Tamilian.
Kasturi noted that prominent Telugu-rooted dynasties like the Nayaks and Thanjavur kings did not engage in divisive identity politics, unlike the groups she referenced.
She further clarified, stating that she referenced “staff of consorts,” not “descendants of consorts,” and noted that DMK leader M. Karunanidhi had himself acknowledged that they were artisans and musicians.
She claimed that her critics were largely DMK cadres and that her comments targeted the DMK’s ideological stance, which she argued unfairly portrays Brahmins as “foreign” to Tamil Nadu.
She asserted: “My statement was that the DMK has been indulging in Brahmin persecution, Sanatana opposition, and Hindu god humiliation. I can’t call it atheism, as they don’t comment on any other religion but are particularly hostile toward Hindu gods and Hindu worship. They are anti-Hindu, anti-Brahmin, and anti-Sanatana.”
Kasturi claimed that her remarks were directed at the DMK’s “outsider politics,” which, in her view, stigmatises Brahmins while ignoring the historical migrations of other groups into Tamil Nadu.
–IANS
Comments are closed.