Telangana

BJP leader’s ‘support to kill Prakash Raj’ remark sparks row; complaints filed

Listen to Story
Hyderabad Prakash Raj Appears Before Sit In Online Betting Case

HYDERABAD: A senior Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) functionary in Telangana has sparked controversy after stating he would “fully support” anyone who kills actor Prakash Raj, following the latter’s remarks at a literary festival.

Vanipally Srinivas Reddy, BJP Ranga Reddy Urban District president, made the statement during a press conference in Karmanghat on April 22. He accused the actor of repeatedly “insulting Hindu gods” and called for a boycott of the actor by the Telugu film industry.

“You cannot keep insulting our gods. We will not let you work,” Reddy said. He added that portrayals of Lord Ram and Lord Krishna as comic characters were no longer acceptable, saying, “This is new Bharat. We will not keep quiet.”

Legal notice and complaint intensify dispute

The controversy has already led to legal and police action. Bhanu Prakash Reddy, a Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams (TTD) board member and BJP leader, has issued a legal notice to the actor. Separately, actor Karate Kalyani has filed a police complaint.

Reddy also criticised the actor’s personal beliefs, alleging inconsistency between his public stance as an atheist and personal practices.

Satirical Ramayana play at centre of row

The backlash follows a satirical narration by Prakash Raj at a Kerala literary festival. The actor described a fictional Ramayana-themed play where ants replace human characters.

In the story, Ram, Sita and Lakshman travel south during exile and enter a forest owned by Ravan. When Lakshman wishes to eat fruits, Ram initially hesitates but later allows it, citing hunger. Ravan, informed by Shurpanakha, does not object to them eating but asks them to compensate by planting seeds to grow new trees.

The narrative concludes with a symbolic exchange between Ram, identified as being from the North, and Ravan from the South. The audience reportedly responded with laughter.

The satire was presented as commentary on perceived cultural and linguistic imposition, particularly the spread of Hindi.

(For article corrections, please email hyderabadmailorg@gmail.com or fill out the Grievance Redressal Form.)