#MeToo movement: Actress Sruthi Hariharan accuses Arjun Sarja of "lewd" behaviour
Bengaluru, Oct 20: Actress Sruthi Hariharan Saturday accused prominent south Indian actor Arjun Sarja of "lewd and complete unprofessional behavior" with her during the shooting for a bilingual film in 2016.
The actress, who has essayed roles in several Kannada films, in a post on her Facebook page praising "#metoo" movement has shared about the incident that left her "startled" and took a while for her to "recover".
Sarja, a multi-lingual actor, has said he is pained by the allegation and would file a case.
Narrating the incident that she alleged happened in 2016, Sruthi said, she was shooting for a bilingual film which starred Arjun Sarja, a man whose movies she grew up watching, and was excited about the opportunity.
"The first few days seemed normal, I played his wife in the film and that day we were to do a romantic scene where we had to hug each other after a brief dialogue.
During the rehearsal, we delivered our lines and Mr Arjun hugs me. With no forewarning or permission, he runs his hands intimately up and down my back," her post said.
"He pulls me closer with my body taut against his and asks the director if we could use this idea of foreplay in the scene. I was aghast," she said in the post.
Sruthi said she was all for depicting realism in cinema, but this felt "absolutely wrong."
"His intent seemed anything but professional. I hated that he did it and angry that I didn't know what to say then,"she said, adding that every actor she has worked with before and after Arjun Sarja, have never resorted to this.
Further noting that the director sensed her "discomfort", Sruthi said she made sure that she let the direction department know that she was not interested to be a part of rehearsals and would come directly for takes.
She also shared the incident with her make up team right after, Sruthi said in her post.
"The incident happened in front of at least 50 people on a shooting set- it happened at my workplace.
I wanted nothing but to stay away from him rather than be tolerant and put up with his lewd and complete unprofessional behavior,"she said.
She said she continued shooting as a "professional," During the course of production, every "smutty innuendo" he made, created an "unpalatable" work environment for me, the post said.
"His salacious invitations to meet him after work appalled me. Looking back I remember attempting to normalise his behaviour and ignore his comments- lest there be issues in the production of the film in entirety.
I maintained a cordial distance. All the while knowing he was wrong and wondering why he never stopped," Sruthi said.
Explaining about her intention to come out now, she said "henceforth I think Mr Arjun Sarja needs to make sure he doesn't cross the thin line between two actors and use his position of power to cause another person discomfort or hurt.
"I choose to do this publicly- cos this movement is more than you and me and our individual experiences. It is a collective voice to question an existing system of power play and to call a spade for what it is," the actress added.
In his reaction to the charge to a local Kannada news channel that has been posted on Arjun Sarja's Facebook post by his team, he said, "..I don't have the cheap mentality, keeping the profession as the medium. I'm deeply pained.
I don't know how to react to this, but hundred per cent I'm going to file a case against this."
The actor said he has great respect for womanhood from childhood, adding he has never involved in any incident that is disrespectful of women or embarrass them.
He said he respects "#metoo" and values it, but cautioned about it being misused, leading to the movement losing its value.
He said in 150 movies that he has acted in, he has shared screen space with 60-70 actresses and has good relationship with all of them.
"If somebody is making such allegation against me, I feel pity for her. What to tell this girl.She had expressed intentions that she wants to act more films with me. I'm surprised," the actor said.
He also questioned as to why Sruthi did not react, if she felt that he misbehaved with her.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Single higher education regulator bill tabled in LS; Oppn flags ‘centralisation,' JPC likely
New Delhi: A bill to set up a 13-member body to regulate institutions of higher education was introduced in the Lok Sabha on Monday.
Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan introduced the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, which seeks to establish an overarching higher education commission along with three councils for regulation, accreditation, and ensuring academic standards for universities and higher education institutions in India.
Meanwhile, the move drew strong opposition, with members warning that it could weaken institutional autonomy and result in excessive centralisation of higher education in India.
The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025, earlier known as the Higher Education Council of India (HECI) Bill, has been introduced in line with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.
The proposed legislation seeks to merge three existing regulatory bodies, the University Grants Commission (UGC), the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), into a single unified body called the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan.
At present, the UGC regulates non-technical higher education institutions, the AICTE oversees technical education, and the NCTE governs teacher education in India.
Under the proposed framework, the new commission will function through three separate councils responsible for regulation, accreditation, and the maintenance of academic standards across universities and higher education institutions in the country.
According to the Bill, the present challenges faced by higher educational institutions due to the multiplicity of regulators having non-harmonised regulatory approval protocols will be done away with.
The higher education commission, which will be headed by a chairperson appointed by the President of India, will cover all central universities and colleges under it, institutes of national importance functioning under the administrative purview of the Ministry of Education, including IITs, NITs, IISc, IISERs, IIMs, and IIITs.
At present, IITs and IIMs are not regulated by the University Grants Commission (UGC).
Government to refer bill to JPC; Oppn slams it
The government has expressed its willingness to refer it to a joint committee after several members of the Lok Sabha expressed strong opposition to the Bill, stating that they were not given time to study its provisions.
Responding to the opposition, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said the government intends to refer the Bill to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for detailed examination.
Congress Lok Sabha MP Manish Tewari warned that the Bill could result in “excessive centralisation” of higher education. He argued that the proposed law violates the constitutional division of legislative powers between the Union and the states.
According to him, the Bill goes beyond setting academic standards and intrudes into areas such as administration, affiliation, and the establishment and closure of university campuses. These matters, he said, fall under Entry 25 of the Concurrent List and Entry 32 of the State List, which cover the incorporation and regulation of state universities.
Tewari further stated that the Bill suffers from “excessive delegation of legislative power” to the proposed commission. He pointed out that crucial aspects such as accreditation frameworks, degree-granting powers, penalties, institutional autonomy, and even the supersession of institutions are left to be decided through rules, regulations, and executive directions. He argued that this amounts to a violation of established constitutional principles governing delegated legislation.
Under the Bill, the regulatory council will have the power to impose heavy penalties on higher education institutions for violating provisions of the Act or related rules. Penalties range from ₹10 lakh to ₹75 lakh for repeated violations, while establishing an institution without approval from the commission or the state government could attract a fine of up to ₹2 crore.
Concerns were also raised by members from southern states over the Hindi nomenclature of the Bill. N.K. Premachandran, an MP from the Revolutionary Socialist Party representing Kollam in Kerala, said even the name of the Bill was difficult to pronounce.
He pointed out that under Article 348 of the Constitution, the text of any Bill introduced in Parliament must be in English unless Parliament decides otherwise.
DMK MP T.M. Selvaganapathy also criticised the government for naming laws and schemes only in Hindi. He said the Constitution clearly mandates that the nomenclature of a Bill should be in English so that citizens across the country can understand its intent.
Congress MP S. Jothimani from Tamil Nadu’s Karur constituency described the Bill as another attempt to impose Hindi and termed it “an attack on federalism.”
_vb_22.jpeg)
