
Tamil star under arrest for Rs 1,000 loan fraud: Who is ‘Powerstar' Srinivasan?
Srinivasan, popularly known as Powerstar, has long been a colorful personality in the Tamil film world. Known for his exaggerated facial reactions, animated body movements, and distinct voice modulation, he carved a niche in the comedic genre. His comic energy and eccentric screen persona in films like Kanna Laddu Thinna Aasaiya, I, and Onbathula Guru earned him a cult following. Over time, audiences started identifying him with the nickname Powerstar, which evolved into a permanent screen identity and a brand in its own right.While he often appeared in secondary roles, his presence rarely went unnoticed. Whether sharing the screen with major actors or in smaller-budget productions, Srinivasan's scenes frequently drew laughter and attention, largely due to his outlandish portrayals. Despite not being a conventional leading man, his visibility and peculiar charisma made him a regular fixture in Tamil cinema for over a decade.
Recently, Srinivasan added another feather to his cap by taking on the protagonist's role in a new Tamil film titled Perfume. This move signaled his ambition to go beyond comic cameos and carve a path as a full-fledged hero. For fans who have long celebrated his over-the-top humor and larger-than-life screen antics, this film offered a refreshing shift. However, this high point in his cinematic career was quickly overshadowed by a major legal storm brewing around him.As reported by News18 , Srinivasan has been arrested by the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) of Delhi Police. The allegations revolve around a purported attempt to mediate a Rs 1000 crore loan for a businessman through financial channels. He is accused of accepting Rs 5 crore as commission but failing to deliver the promised financial package.The businessman in question eventually filed a formal complaint, claiming deceit and suspecting fraudulent conduct. The EOW, following its investigation, took Srinivasan into custody. His arrest has sparked shockwaves, especially considering his previous public image as an entertainer and social commentator.Further investigations have unearthed a concerning legal history. Since 2018, Srinivasan reportedly failed to appear in court for multiple legal proceedings. Authorities suggest that he deliberately avoided these summons, leading to mounting judicial scrutiny.The revelations didn't end there. According to the Delhi Police's economic crime division, six unresolved criminal cases involving Srinivasan have been pending in various courts across Chennai. These too relate to alleged fraudulent financial activities. The accumulation of such cases over the years suggests a pattern of questionable business practices, severely damaging his public standing.Srinivasan's career arc has never been typical. After earning a degree from Madurai Kamaraj University, he pursued a course in acupressure therapy from a Chinese institution via correspondence. Initially working as a practitioner, he later shifted gears to enter the finance industry. Setting up his firm, Baba Trading Company, in Chennai's Anna Nagar, he promoted financial consultancy services, claiming to facilitate large-scale loans through various banks and institutions.This venture into finance was paralleled by his growing passion for the film world. In 2010, he appeared in his first film Unakkaga Oru Kavithai, playing a supporting character. He followed this with Neethana Avan in the same year, where he adopted the moniker Powerstar, laying the foundation for the quirky image that would later define his cinematic appeal.Srinivasan's next step was bolder—he produced and acted in Lathika (2011), a film that barely created ripples on its release. Undeterred, the makers later put up widespread hoardings across Chennai, absurdly claiming the film had completed a 220-day successful run, albeit at just one theater. The publicity stunt generated unexpected buzz, giving him newfound attention. Fans, intrigued by this outlandish marketing, began forming online communities in his name.Capitalizing on the viral success, he went on to fund and feature in projects like Ananda Thollai, Abhinava, and Desiya Nedunchalai. However, many of these ventures remained incomplete or failed to find mainstream release. Nonetheless, his public antics and exaggerated characters kept him relevant in the meme culture of Tamil entertainment.His real turning point came in 2013, when comedian and actor Santhanam cast him in Kanna Laddu Thinna Aasaiya, a successful comedy film. The movie opened to rave reviews, with critics praising its infectious humor. Srinivasan's performance stood out, with many lauding his comic timing and screen presence.
His performance opened doors to offers from reputed filmmakers. Notably, he was initially included in Bala's Paradesi and Shankar's big-budget I. While he was eventually dropped from Paradesi, his brief appearance in I helped reinforce his marketability. Post-2013, Srinivasan continued appearing in films such as Arya Surya and Summa Nachunu Irukku. Most of these were modest in scope but benefited from his presence, often using him as a promotional hook. His comedic reputation helped smaller filmmakers gain visibility, even if only momentarily.He also became a common face in promotional music videos and cameo appearances, his image often used as a symbol of eccentric fun. For a while, it seemed he had managed to balance his film antics and entrepreneurial ventures, albeit in an unconventional manner.The latest developments have cast a long shadow over Srinivasan's career. Longtime admirers, once entertained by his antics, now find themselves disillusioned. The actor, who once used his screen time to advocate for public causes and social welfare, is now entangled in a series of damning legal battles.While his latest film, Perfume, marked a potential turning point, these serious accusations and arrests threaten to bring his acting journey to a premature halt. The Tamil film industry and fans alike are closely following court proceedings, uncertain whether their beloved Powerstar can script a comeback—or if his cinematic saga has reached its final act.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Indian Express
26 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Russian woman leaves India with child: SC raps Delhi Police for ‘sheer negligence' in custody dispute case
Hearing a child custody dispute between a Russian woman and her Indian husband, the Supreme Court on Friday said that she has left the country with the minor child due to the 'sheer negligence' of the Delhi Police. It also urged the authorities to get in touch with the Indian Embassy in Moscow to bring the minor back. 'At the outset, we are constrained to observe that the incident of taking away the child by the petitioner has happened apparently due to sheer negligence and failure of the Delhi Police in performing its duties in terms of the direction contained in… our order dated May 22, 2025,' a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi said. The bench said that on May 22, it had directed that a discreet but strict vigil be kept on the woman. Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, appearing for the Union government, had on the last date of hearing told the SC that the woman, after leaving her rented accommodation in Delhi, had travelled to Russia via Nepal and UAE with the child. '… that means for four days, she was in Nepal. Had the Delhi Police taken any course of action, we are quite sure that preventive measures could be taken to not allow her to board the flight,' the SC said on Friday. The bench added that 'forging/duplication of the passport of the child', which has been 'committed', was also 'apparently not considered by the Delhi Police'. The SC called this a 'flagrant violation of its orders'. Observing that it was not 'that simple' matrimonial dispute, the bench said, 'The Union of India also must keep in mind that the minor child has been taken from the custody of this court. It is not a case of a custodial dispute between the parents of the child, whose custody has not been handed over to either the father or the mother. It was in exercise of our duty as parens patriae that we were resolving the issue and the child was in the custody of the court.' Bhati said that while authorities are trying to get information from Nepal, the UAE, and Russia, foreign airlines, citing privacy, were reluctant to share travel data. But the SC said that no airline can claim privacy when a crime is committed. It maintained that the authorities should make an effort to bring the child back to the country by exploring diplomatic channels and talking to the Indian ambassador in Moscow. It gave 10 days to the Delhi Police to file a fresh status report depicting some tangible action to bring the child back. Referring to its May 22 order, the bench said that it had then asked the police to maintain discreet but effective vigil over residences of both parents and to depute women personnel who could enter the woman's residence in case of an emergency. However, this was not done even after the man complained; the court pointed out, adding that the CCTV camera footage showed the woman leaving the premises with the child through the back door. Justice Kant asked, 'What were the police doing?' He added that 'it is a clear case of criminal negligence' and that the court will not spare the police. Ananthakrishnan G. is a Senior Assistant Editor with The Indian Express. He has been in the field for over 23 years, kicking off his journalism career as a freelancer in the late nineties with bylines in The Hindu. A graduate in law, he practised in the District judiciary in Kerala for about two years before switching to journalism. His first permanent assignment was with The Press Trust of India in Delhi where he was assigned to cover the lower courts and various commissions of inquiry. He reported from the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court of India during his first stint with The Indian Express in 2005-2006. Currently, in his second stint with The Indian Express, he reports from the Supreme Court and writes on topics related to law and the administration of justice. Legal reporting is his forte though he has extensive experience in political and community reporting too, having spent a decade as Kerala state correspondent, The Times of India and The Telegraph. He is a stickler for facts and has several impactful stories to his credit. ... Read More


News18
an hour ago
- News18
A Quiet Place Part III Gets 2027 Release Date, John Krasinski To Direct Once Again
Last Updated: John Krasinski returns as director for A Quiet Place Part III, set to release on July 9, 2027. Plot and cast details remain under wraps. The much-anticipated A Quiet Place Part III is officially happening, and John Krasinski is back at the helm. As per Variety, Krasinski will serve as the director, writer, and producer for the third main installment in Paramount's hit horror-thriller franchise. He confirmed the news on August 1 via Instagram, along with updates on the Michael Sarnoski-directed spinoff, A Quiet Place: Day One. The next chapter in the Quiet Place saga is slated to hit theatres on July 9, 2027. However, plot details are tightly under wraps, and it remains unknown whether franchise regulars Emily Blunt, Noah Jupe, and Millicent Simmonds will reprise their roles. The new installment will once again revolve around the terrifying alien creatures with hypersensitive hearing that have decimated human populations. According to Variety, the film is expected to continue exploring the idea of humans using whispers and silence to survive in a hostile, post-apocalyptic world. The film will be produced under Krasinski's banner Sunday Night Productions, along with Allyson Seeger and Platinum Dunes. Notably, Seeger's company has a first-look deal with Paramount, solidifying their creative stake in the franchise's future. The A Quiet Place franchise has been a commercial powerhouse, grossing over $900 million worldwide across three films. The original, released in 2018, was a critical and box-office success, raking in $50.2 million on its opening weekend and going on to earn $341 million globally. Its sequel, A Quiet Place Part II, faced delays due to the pandemic but still managed to pull in $297.3 million worldwide. The 2024 spinoff A Quiet Place: Day One, directed by Michael Sarnoski and starring Lupita Nyong'o, Joseph Quinn, and Djimon Hounsou, was also a hit, collecting $262 million globally. Set in a crumbling New York City ravaged by the alien invasion, the spinoff expanded the franchise's universe and mythology. With Part III now officially dated and John Krasinski once again leading the charge, fans of the suspense-filled series can begin the countdown to what promises to be another edge-of-the-seat thriller. Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.


Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
High court upholds summons to Kangana Rananut in ‘Rs 100' tweet defamation case
Chandigarh: The Punjab and Haryana high court on Friday dismissed a petition filed by actor-turned-MP Kangana Ranaut challenging her summoning by a Punjab court in a defamation case, making it clear that the magistrate has duly applied mind to the material on record while summoning her. Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya, in a detailed 15-page order, said, "There are specific allegations against the petitioner who is a celebrity, that false and defamatory imputations by her in the retweet have dented the respondent's (Mahender Kaur) reputation and lowered her in her own estimation, as also in the eyes of others. Therefore, filing of the complaint to vindicate her rights cannot be termed mala fide." Ranaut is accused of defaming 73-year-old Mohinder Kaur, a farmer activist, through a tweet during the height of the farmers' protests against the now scrapped farm laws in 2020. Ranaut allegedly misidentified Kaur as Bilkis Bano of Shaheen Bagh fame and implied that such women could be hired to participate in protests for Rs 100. "Such remark, prima facie proves that the intent of the accused was to paint the complainant as a person of dubious integrity who is protesting without any cause and just for financial gains," the high court observed. Ranaut's counsel had contended that the trial court misconstrued provisions of Section 202 of CrPC and argued that she had only re-tweeted content by 'Adhivakta Gautam Yadav', who was not arrayed as an accused. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like She grew up to be America's sweetheart... can YOU guess? Watch More Undo The counsel pleaded that the retweet was made in good faith, without intent to harm Kaur's reputation, and in the absence of mens rea, the magistrate should not have proceeded. The order was passed on Feb 22, 2022. Senior advocate G K Mann, representing the complainant, argued that there was no dispute that Ranaut herself made the defamatory on the face of it retweet, which contains serious allegations against Kaur's character. Mann also said that Ranaut had shown no remorse or tendered any apology, suggesting intentional harm. The bench concluded that the summoning order was passed after due application of mind to the facts and preliminary evidence. The court also noted that it was not the petitioner's case that the retweet was not made by her. Regarding the complaint being filed solely against Ranaut, the judge observed, "Still further, because the respondent has filed a complaint only against the petitioner and not against the person to whom the original tweet has been attributed, in itself cannot be a ground to contend that the complaint is mala fide." 'Extra responsibility' on celebrities "As she (Kangana) holds a position of influence over the masses, she has extra responsibility on her shoulders to verify the truthfulness of the remarks made by her. It is evident from the evidence led by the complainant that the accused (Kangana) made the impugned defamatory remark without going into the truthfulness... She even failed to tender any apology to the complainant after knowing the truth." Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya Complaint was filed in 2021 The defamation complaint was filed on Jan 4, 2021, by Mohinder Kaur of Fatehgarh Jandia village in Bathinda. Kaur initiated the case in Bathinda court against Ranaut for her tweet (which was later deleted) that identified Kaur as Bilkis Bano of Shaheen Bagh fame and claimed such women could be hired for protests for Rs 100. Kaur had provided evidence asserting that Ranaut's words had damaged her image. The farmer stated that her family, owning 12 acres of land, found the accusation of protesting for a mere Rs 100 intolerable. MSID:: 123044276 413 |