Actor Jayaprada moves Madras High Court challenging her conviction and six months imprisonment

Actor Jayapradha challenges ESIC conviction in Madras HC; seeks to set aside 6-month jail term. Justice G. Jayachandran grants 1wk for ESIC to file counter affidavit; asks counsel to find if ₹37.68 lakh can be cleared. HC Registry to list petitions on Oct 18 for further hearing. #ESIC #Jayapradha #MadrasHC

Actor and former Member of Parliament Jayapradha has approached the Madras High Court challenging the conviction and six months’ of simple imprisonment imposed on her by a Metropolitan Magistrate on August 10, 2023, for having not paid Employees State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) dues with respect to the former employees of the now defunct Jayaprada Theatre on General Patters Road in Chennai.

Justice G. Jayachandran on Friday granted a week’s time for the ESIC to file a counter affidavit to the petitions preferred by the actor. He also asked her counsel to find out whether the outstanding amount of ₹37.68 lakh could be cleared by then. The judge directed the High Court Registry to list the five petitions filed by the actor once again on October 18, for further hearing.

The ESIC had lodged five different complaints against the actor and other partners of the cinema theatre before the second Metropolitan Magistrate in Chennai in 2005. One of those complaints was related to the non-payment of ₹8.17 lakh for the period between November 1, 1991 and September 30, 2022 and three other complaints were related to non-payment of ₹1.58 lakh for different periods between 2002 and 2004.

The fifth complaint was regarding non-submission of the return of contributions, for the period that ended in September 2003. In her defence, the actor told the Magistrate that the partnership firm was wound up in 2008 and that the theatre was non-functional as on date. However, the Magistrate went on to convict her for the offences under the ESIC Act after observing that the crimes had been committed much before 2008.

Passing identical orders on all five complaints lodged by the ESIC, the Magistrate had directed the actor to undergo simple imprisonment for six months besides discharging the entire liability for which the complaints had been made. Since the actor was not present on the day when the judgement was pronounced on August 10, the Magistrate also issued non-bailable arrest warrants to secure her presence and to make her undergo the punishment.