Chennai, August 12, 2023
Introduction
Veteran actor and politician Jaya Prada has been handed a six-month prison sentence and fined ₹5000 by a Chennai court for her involvement in a case related to non-payment of Employee State Insurance (ESI) funds to workers of a theatre she owned. The court’s verdict comes after a prolonged legal battle that began when theatre workers accused her of withholding their ESI contributions.
Jaya Prada, known for her illustrious career in the Hindi and Telugu film industries during the ’70s, ’80s, and early ’90s, had owned a theatre in Chennai which eventually closed down. Subsequently, allegations arose that the ESI deductions from the workers’ salaries were not deposited with the Government Insurance Corporation as required by law.
The Labour Government Insurance Corporation took legal action against Jaya Prada and her associates, including Ram Kumar and Raja Babu, in the Egmore Magistrate Court. While Jaya Prada reportedly admitted to the charges and expressed her intention to clear the dues, her appeal for dismissal of the case was denied by the court. As a result, the court sentenced her to six months of imprisonment and imposed a fine of ₹5000.
Jaya Prada, who gained prominence in the South Indian film industry at a young age, made her Bollywood debut with the film “Sargam” in 1979, which marked the beginning of her successful career. She appeared in a string of hit films, including “Kaamchor” (1982), “Tohfa” (1984), “Sharaabi” (1984), “Maqsad” (1984), “Sanjog” (1985), “Aakhree Raasta” (1986), “Elaan-E-Jung” (1989), “Aaj Ka Arjun” (1990), “Thanedaar” (1990), “Maa” (1991), and numerous Telugu films.
The verdict has brought attention to the importance of adhering to employment regulations and fulfilling financial obligations towards workers. The case against Jaya Prada underscores the significance of timely and accurate payment of ESI contributions to ensure the welfare and rights of employees.
Conclusion
Jaya Prada has yet to issue an official statement in response to the court’s decision. Her legal representatives are expected to consider further legal actions or appeals in light of the verdict.
