English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

SC asks woman claiming to be Jayalalithaa’s daughter to move Karnataka HC

Published

on

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Amrutha Sarathy, brought up as the daughter of the late AIADMK chief’s estranged sister, claims a DNA test will prove Jayalalithaa was her real mother

The continuing war within the AIADMK and among close aides of J Jayalalithaa to claim the deceased leader’s legacy got a fresh twist on Monday as a woman – 37-year-old Amrutha Sarathy – moved the Supreme Court seeking a DNA test which she claimed would prove that she is the biological daughter of the former Tamil Nadu chief minister.

While the Supreme Court Bench of Justices Madan B Lokur and Deepak Gupta dismissed the writ petition moved by Amrutha through her counsel, senior advocate Indira Jaisingh, on the grounds that it was not maintainable under Article 32 of the Constitution, the new twist in the ever-evolving AIADMK political potboiler is clearly one that will be keenly monitored.

The disappointment in the Supreme Court is not likely to dissuade Amrutha, who was brought up as the daughter of Jayalalithaa’s estranged younger sister Shylaja, from pressing for a DNA test to establish that the deceased Tamil icon was her real mother.

Amrutha has been told by the apex court that she can approach the Karnataka High Court with her demand.

Since Jayalalithaa’s ‘mysterious’ death at Chennai’s Apollo Hospital last year, there has been a constant war between political leaders and her close-confidante, the jailed VK Sasikala, for claiming the former chief minister’s legacy.

While it seemed the patch-up between Jayalalithaa’s political aides – Tamil Nadu chief minister Edappadi Palaniswamy and his deputy O Panneerselvam – and their recent victory against VK Sasikala in the quest to get rights to the AIADMK’s ‘two-leaves’ election symbol, was the beginning of an end to the legacy-war, Amrutha’s claim now adds a new twist to the saga.

Interestingly, Amrutha’s aunts – LS Lalitha and Ranjani Ravindranath – both cousins of Jayalalithaa, are co-petitioners in the case that the 37-year-old had filed. Lalithaa and Ranjani had sought the apex court’s intervention to help Amrutha prove her relationship with Jayalalithaa, which they claim was thwarted by AIADMK leader Sasikala.

Amrutha’s story is fascinating, one that could easily pass off as a spicy movie script in Bollywood, or even the Tamil film industry of which Jayalalithaa was a reigning queen before her plunge into politics.

Amrutha has claimed that she was born on August 14, 1980, at Jayalalithaa’s residence in the Mylapore neighbourhood of Chennai but the birth was kept a secret to avoid social stigma and “uphold the dignity of the family as they belonged to a very religious, orthodox and cultured Brahmin family”.

Jayalalithaa, at least as per known official records, had never married and Amrutha’s petition didn’t expressly mention who she believes her biological father was. However, in her petition before the SC, Amrutha claimed that she was adopted by Jayalalithaa’s elder sister, Shylaja, at birth. Shylaja died in 2015 while her husband, Sarathy, died in March this year. Amrutha’s petition claims that on his deathbed, Sarathy confessed that he was in a relationship with Jayalalithaa.

“It was upon the death of Late Ms. J. Jayalalitha that Amrutha came to know through close family relatives – LS Lalitha and Ranjani Ravindranath – that she is in fact the biological daughter of Late Ms. J. Jayalalitha and thus, to ascertain the same, the Petitioners herein are seeking remedy under Article 32 of the Constitution of India for a declaration of the same through an identifiable method to know the maternity i.e., through deoxyribonucleic acid test (hereinafter referred to as DNA Test) which is to be undertaken by any institute of national repute to ascertain and establish the maternity of the Petitioner No.1 (Amrutha),” states the petition.

As per official records, Jayalalithaa is known to have only one sibling, a brother – the late Jayakumar. Curiously, Jayakumar’s daughter Deepa Jayakumar, has refuted the claims being made by Amrutha while other close aides of Jayalalithaa have on earlier occasions asserted that she had no other sibling.

Detailing the circumstances of her birth in her petition, Amrutha says: “It was decided amongst the family members that the birth and adoption of the Petitioner No.1 will be kept as a secret and therefore all of them, viz., Late Mrs. Jayalakshmi, Late Ms. J. Jayalalitha, Late Mrs. Shylaja and her husband Late Mr. Sararthy took a promise in front of God and amongst themselves that they will not disclose the true facts and circumstances of birth of the Petitioner No. 1.”

However, Amrutha goes on to say in her petition that that she had visited Jayalalithaa on several occasions during her lifetime and that the AIADMK chief would always treat her with “motherly affection” and had even had her enrolled as a member of the AIADMK.

Things, according to Amrutha, seem to have taken a sudden turn for the worse when Jayalalithaa was hospitalized last year at Apollo Hospital. During the over 70-day hospitalized, which eventually ended with Jayalalithaa’s demise, Amrutha claims she often tried to meet her ‘mother’ but that she was chased away by the security on Sasikala’s instructions. She also alleges that she was obstructed from paying her last respects to Jayalalithaa at the Rajaji Hall.

The mystery around Amrutha’s ‘foster’ mother Shylaja:

In an interview to Junior Vikatan in 2014, Shylaja claimed that she is the third sibling born to Sandhya and Jayaram, with Jayalalithaa being the eldest and Jayakumar the middle child. “I was a three-month-old foetus when my father died. My mother entered films and gave me to art director Damodar Pillai’s son, who raised me,” Shylaja told JV.

According to Shylaja, she lived in Ramanathapuram till the age of five. In the interview to Junior Vikatan, Shylaja had also claimed that Jayalalithaa’s mother, Sandhya, used to meet her twice or thrice a week. “She used to take me out to buy chocolate. She used to make me wear gold and feel happy. She once took me to JC road Shivaji theatre to watch my akka’s (elder sister Jayalalithaa) film.”

However, when quizzed on whether she had any document to prove her story, Shylaja had replied in the negative. She said she had a photograph with her mother Sandhya but it was “somehow lost”. Like Amrutha is doing now, Shylaja had then claimed: “If you take my DNA test you will know (that I am Jayalalithaa’s sister)… When I was 16 years old, my adopted father took me to the Kannada superstar Rajkumar uncle. As soon as he saw me, Rajkumar asked Damodaran, ‘Is this Sandhya’s daughter?’ To that, my father said yes.”[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

India News

Ajit Pawar dismisses speculation on Supriya Sule joining BJP

Ajit Pawar has dismissed speculation about Supriya Sule joining the BJP, calling such rumours exaggerated and stressing that his focus remains on elections and development.

Published

on

Ajit Pawar

Amid renewed political speculation around Nationalist Congress Party–Sharad Pawar (NCP-SP) leader Supriya Sule’s future, Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Ajit Pawar on Monday dismissed rumours of her joining the BJP, stating that he is “not an astrologer” and prefers to focus on governance and electoral outcomes rather than conjecture.

The remarks came after Sule publicly praised Prime Minister Narendra Modi for sending all-party delegations abroad following Operation Sindoor, triggering fresh political chatter in Maharashtra’s volatile landscape.

Ajit Pawar rejects political speculation

Responding to questions from the media, Ajit Pawar said speculative interpretations are often exaggerated and unnecessarily amplified.

“I am not an astrologer. Such speculative questions often become breaking news without reason. My focus is on development until January 15,” he said, seeking to put an end to the rumours.

On whether there is any possibility of the two factions of the Nationalist Congress Party coming together, Pawar said the immediate priority is electoral success.

“At present, our top priority is winning the elections. We are working with full effort to ensure a positive outcome,” he said.

On NCP reunification and family ties

Addressing broader questions on a possible reunification between the NCP and NCP-SP, Pawar used a familial analogy, suggesting that unity cannot be ruled out.

“We are one family. In every family, people come together during moments of happiness and sorrow. If family members decide to stand together, there is nothing wrong in that,” he said.

However, he did not indicate any concrete move or timeline for such a reunion.

Thackeray brothers’ reunion and voter behaviour

Commenting on the coming together of the Thackeray brothers, Pawar said the development could have electoral consequences.

“Shiv Sena (UBT) and MNS traditionally had different voter bases. With them coming together, vote division could reduce, which may benefit them electorally,” he said.

Pawar clarified that he played no role in facilitating the reunion but welcomed the move, calling it a positive development within a political family.

He also cautioned against assuming uniform voter consolidation, noting that voting behaviour varies across elections.

“Voters think differently in national, state and local elections. The results of the Lok Sabha and subsequent Assembly elections clearly show that,” he added.

On free facilities, local alliances and Mumbai remark

Responding to criticism over promises of free facilities, Pawar said such decisions rest with the Chief Minister at the state level and the Prime Minister at the national level. He added that at the local body level, his experience of over two decades guides his approach.

On alliances involving parties like the NCP, Shiv Sena and AIMIM in local bodies such as the Parli Municipal Corporation, Pawar said such arrangements are common and often finalised locally without involving senior leadership.

He also strongly rejected remarks by a BJP leader claiming Mumbai is not part of Maharashtra.

“Mumbai is in India, and within India, it is in Maharashtra. It will always remain a part of Maharashtra. Such statements are made around elections to draw attention,” Pawar said.

On Bharat Ratna for Sharad Pawar

When asked whether NCP founder Sharad Pawar should be awarded the Bharat Ratna, Ajit Pawar said the decision lies with the Central government.

“Sharad Pawar has served public life for over 60 years and taken many important decisions. Anyone is free to express an opinion, but the final call rests with the Centre,” he said.

Continue Reading

India News

PSLV comeback mission hit by third-stage anomaly during launch from Sriharikota

ISRO’s PSLV-C62 mission faced a third-stage anomaly around 30 minutes after launch, raising concerns over the rocket’s comeback flight after its 2025 failure.

Published

on

PSLV LAUNCH

At 10.18 am on Tuesday, the Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)-C62 lifted off from the Satish Dhawan Space Centre in Sriharikota, carrying 16 satellites into space. The launch marked the first PSLV mission of the year and was being closely watched as a comeback attempt following a failure in 2025.

Roughly 30 minutes after liftoff, the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) stated that the mission had “encountered an anomaly” during its third stage. The space agency has initiated a detailed analysis but has not yet officially declared the mission a failure.

Third stage issue raises concerns again

The PSLV is a four-stage launch vehicle, with the first two stages reportedly performing as expected during Tuesday’s mission. The problem surfaced during the third stage, where deviation was observed.

ISRO chairman Dr V Narayanan said that a detailed assessment is underway. Historically, issues during the third stage of a rocket have often resulted in mission failure, although ISRO has so far avoided using that term for this launch.

The setback is significant as this was intended to be a recovery mission. The PSLV’s only launch in 2025 had also failed due to a third-stage issue. An analysis committee was formed after that failure, but its findings were not made public.

Mission payload and satellite loss

The mission aimed to place a surveillance satellite into orbit. The earth observation satellite, named Anvesha, was developed by the Defence Research and Development Organisation. Alongside it, the PSLV carried 15 additional satellites from multiple countries, including Brazil, Nepal and the UK.

With the anomaly occurring mid-mission, these satellites are now believed to be lost.

Track record remains strong despite setback

The PSLV has completed 64 missions so far, with four failures recorded prior to this launch. If the current mission is eventually declared unsuccessful, it would mark the fifth failure, keeping the overall success rate relatively high.

However, the timing of the anomaly is a concern, given the growing reliance on PSLV for commercial and strategic launches.

Impact on space industry and future launches

The development is particularly worrying for private players in India’s expanding space ecosystem. Several start-ups had payloads on this mission, including Hyderabad-based Dhruva Space, which had placed seven satellites onboard.

The outcome also casts uncertainty over the planned industry-led PSLV launch scheduled for the first half of 2026. That mission is being developed with participation from Hindustan Aeronautics Limited and Larsen and Toubro.

ISRO is expected to conduct a thorough investigation into the third-stage issue before finalising the status of the mission and outlining corrective measures.

Continue Reading

India News

Mani Shankar Aiyar’s remarks on Hindutva spark political backlash from BJP

Congress leader Mani Shankar Aiyar’s comments on Hindutva at a Kolkata debate have triggered sharp reactions from the BJP, escalating the Hinduism versus Hindutva debate.

Published

on

manishankar aiyer

Veteran Congress leader Mani Shankar Aiyar has triggered a political controversy after describing Hindutva as “Hinduism in paranoia” during a public debate in Kolkata, prompting a strong rebuttal from leaders of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

Aiyar made the remarks at a discussion titled “Hinduism needs protection from Hindutva”, organised by the Calcutta Debating Circle at the Calcutta Club on Sunday. Several political leaders, legal experts, historians and journalists participated in the debate.

Aiyar draws distinction between Hinduism and Hindutva

Speaking at the event, Aiyar argued that Hinduism and Hindutva are fundamentally different, describing Hinduism as a spiritual and civilisational faith, while calling Hindutva a political ideology that emerged in the early 20th century.

“Hindutva is Hinduism in paranoia. It asks 80 per cent Hindus to feel threatened by 14 per cent Muslims,” Aiyar said, adding that Hinduism had survived and flourished for thousands of years without the need for what he described as political protection.

He referred to incidents involving attacks by vigilante groups and criticised actions against individuals over religious practices, beef consumption and participation in Christmas celebrations. Aiyar also cited writings of Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, contrasting them with the teachings of Mahatma Gandhi and Swami Vivekananda, whom he described as proponents of non-violence and inclusivity.

According to Aiyar, “There is no way Gandhi’s or Vivekananda’s Hinduism can be protected or promoted by Savarkar’s Hindutva.”

BJP leaders push back strongly

Aiyar’s comments drew an immediate response from BJP leaders present at the debate and later from party spokespersons.

BJP MP Sudhanshu Trivedi questioned the framing of the debate itself, arguing that the term “Hindutva” refers to “Hindu tattva” or the essence of Hindu philosophy. He said that associating Hinduism with the suffix “ism” was misleading and dismissive of India’s indigenous traditions.

“When you cherish Hinduism, it is called Hindutva,” Trivedi said, rejecting the distinction drawn by Aiyar.

BJP spokesperson Shehzad Poonawalla accused Aiyar of repeatedly making remarks that, according to him, insult Sanatan Dharma. He claimed that the comments echoed the Congress party’s broader stance on Hindutva.

Poonawalla also referred to past statements by Congress leaders and said that Hindutva has been defined by the Supreme Court as a “way of life.” He accused the party of attempting to portray Hindutva as violent and divisive.

Political debate intensifies

The exchange has added to the ongoing political debate over the relationship between Hinduism and Hindutva, a subject that has remained contentious in Indian politics. While Aiyar defended his views as ideological and historical critique, BJP leaders framed the remarks as an attack on religious identity.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com