Kerala politicians stand by actor Mammootty facing online harassment, call him state's pride
Thiruvananthapuram, May 16: Politicians from the Left and the Congress party in Kerala have rallied behind Malayalam superstar Mammootty who is facing online harassment from certain right wing sympathisers in connection with one of his movies that had been released two years ago.
The controversy erupted after posts on on social media platforms claimed that the movie 'Puzhu' released in 2022 was an anti-Brahmanical one.
Some of them even used Mammootty's birth name, Muhammed Kutty, to criticise the national award-winning actor in connection with the film, which was a psychological drama directed by debutant filmmaker Ratheena P T.
The row erupted following a recent interview given by the woman director's husband to an online channel in which he claimed that the movie was against a particular community and criticised Mammootty over doing the film.
Rubbishing the social media campaign against the legendary actor, several persons including state Ministers V Sivankutty and K Rajan and AICC General Secretary K C Venugopal came out in support of Mammootty.
Senior CPI (M) leader and General Education Minister V Sivankutty put up a Facebook post sharing a photo of of him with the actor, who has won three national awards, among many other recognitions.
"Mammootty is Malayalees' pride," the minister said in the FB post.
CPI leader and Revenue Minister K Rajan also described Mammootty as the "Pride of Kerala and Malayalees".
The minister alleged that "Sangh Parivar politics" was behind such campaigns and said that such propaganda would not reap its desired results in the state.
"This is Kerala," he pointed out to those behind the campaign. Recalling a similar campaign unleashed against eminent director Kamal some time ago, the minister said the "the Sanghi politics of calling Mammootty as Mohammed Kutty, Kamal as Kamaluddin and Vijay as Joseph Vijay (top Tamil film star who has a large fan following in Kerala) will not reap any result here."
Sharing similar views, AICC General Secretary K C Venugopal also strongly supported Mammootty and said the secular society of the state would not support such propaganda.
He said no matter how hard they try to brand a person who has clear political views and acting skills, the people of the state won't support them.
In an FB post, the Congress leader further said that it is the duty of Kerala society to take care of the actor without being affected by the "poison of hate campaigns".
A person like Mammootty cannot be confined to the compartments of religion and caste, he said, adding that vested interests are doing so with a clear political agenda.
"Mammootty is being Mohammed Kutty only in the contemptuous minds of those hate campaigners," the leader added.
The actor is yet to react to the controversy.
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.
K’taka HC declines stay on menstrual leave order, says issue of public importance
Bengaluru: The State Government has strongly defended its decision to grant one day of paid menstrual leave every month to women employees, telling the Karnataka High Court that the notification was issued in the larger interest of women and is legally sound. The Court, treating the matter as one of significant public importance, refused to stay the implementation of the order and adjourned the hearing to January 20.
The Labour Department’s November 20, 2025 notification was challenged by the Bangalore Hotels Association, Avirat Defence System, Facile Aerospace Technologies Ltd and Samos Technologies Ltd. Justice Jyoti Mulimani heard the petitions on Wednesday.
At the start of the hearing, the bench asked whether the State had filed its objections. Advocate General K. Shashikiran Shetty informed the Court that objections had been submitted and that copies would be provided to the petitioners.
Defending the notification, the Advocate General said the government had introduced a progressive measure aimed at women’s welfare, one that no other state in India had implemented so far. He told the Court that 72 objections were received and considered before finalising the notification. He argued that the government was empowered to frame such policy under Article 42 of the Constitution and noted that the Supreme Court and the Law Commission had earlier made recommendations in this direction.
ALSO READ: MP Brijesh Chowta urges centre to grant point of call status to Mangaluru airport
When the Court asked whether the notification applied to all sectors, the Advocate General replied in the affirmative. The bench observed that the matter required detailed hearing because of its wider public impact and decided to take it up in January. The Court added that petitioners may file their responses to the State’s objections before the next hearing.
Petitioners’ counsel B.K. Prashanth requested that the State be restrained from enforcing the order until the case is decided. The Advocate General responded that the government had already begun implementing the notification across all sectors.
Justice Mulimani noted that nothing would change between now and the next hearing and emphasised that the Court would consider all arguments thoroughly before issuing any direction. The bench then adjourned the matter to January 20 and asked petitioners to file any additional applications with copies to the State’s counsel.
