Actor-Politician Jaya Prada Sentenced To 6 Months Of Imprisonment, Fined Rs 5,000: Reports

Jaya Prada has been convicted for deducting money from her theatre's employees for Employee State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) but not depositing it with the ESIC.

BJP leader Jaya Prada slams Azam Khans son for his remarks.

A Chennai court has sentenced veteran actor and politician Jaya Prada in a case filed in 1991, according to reports. 

Reports also say that Prada has also been fined Rs 5,000 in the case. 

Prada has been in active politics since 1994 and has been a Member of Parliament at both Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha. She is currently a member of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Earlier, she was associated with the Telugu Desam Party (TDP). 

The case in which Prada has been convicted dates to 1991 and is related to the non-payment of Employee State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) money to workers of the theatre she ran with her brother Raj Babu, according to India Today. 

The case dates to 1991 and is related to a now-defunct theatre run by Jaya Prada and her brothers. 

The Bar & Bench reported that her two brothers have also been slapped fines of Rs 5,000 each.

The ESIC filed a complaint against the accused for failing to pay Rs 8,17,794 from 1991 to 2002 and the court ordered the accused to pay the due amount to the complainant, reported India Today.

The Bar & Bench said the theatre was deducting money from the employees' salary but was not depositing it with the Employee State Insurance Corporation (ESIC).

"As per the ESIC, while the management of the now defunct cinema theatre owned by Jayaprada had been deducting ESI amount dues from the workers' dues, it had not been paying the money to the state insurance corporation...Under Section 40 of the ESI Act, the principal employer is required to pay towards the employer’s share of contribution, and the employees’ share of contribution. The principal employer is entitled to recover from the employees, their share of contribution from their wages," reported Bar & Bench. 

In the judgement, the judge said the "offence committed is heinous and deplorable" and no leniency could be considered.