Rebel leader: V S Achuthanandan's impact on CPI(M)
The contradictory stand that he adopted put the party in a tough position many times, and the murder of Revolutionary Marxist Party leader T P Chandrasekharan was one of such incidents.
Chandrasekharan, a former CPI leader who had quit the party following differences with the leadership, was hacked to death by a gang while he was returning home on his bike at Onchiyam in Kozhikode on May 4, 2012.
The murder was allegedly masterminded by the local leaders of the CPI.
Though the party leadership adopted a stand that Chandrasekharan was a "traitor," Achuthanandan never denounced his former party colleague.
When the party argued that the then UDF government's move to order a CBI probe into the gruesome murder was a politically motivated one, VS supported the central agency probe and even wrote to the authorities demanding the same.
He even defied the party's directive not to visit Chandrasekhar's house and called on his widow K K Rema on the politically significant day of Neyyattinkara bypoll in the same year.
The slain leader's house had witnessed highly emotional scenes on the day when VS came there.
Overcome with emotion, Rema wept bitterly, clutching Achuthanandan's folded hands for several seconds. The poignant moment was captured in a photograph that graced the front pages of all major newspapers the following day.
Though Achuthanandan refused to speak to the media at the time, his surprise visit and the subsequent publication of the photo served as a political statement and a clear response to his party on the matter.
An emotional Rema, now the UDF-backed Vadakara MLA, shared the same photo on her Facebook page on Monday as a tribute to the leader, accompanied by a heartfelt note.
This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Kerala University V-C holds talks with staff unions; Left Syndicate members slam V-C's actions
Kerala University Vice-Chancellor in-charge Mohanan Kunnummal on Monday held talks with non-teaching staff unions with a view to addressing the complaints that cropped up following an altercation between some Syndicate members and representatives of university staff unions. Representatives of unions affiliated to the Congress, Communist Party of India, and Bharatiya Janata Party attended the talks, while members of the Communist Party of India (Marxist)-aligned staff union boycotted the meeting. Dr. Kunnummal, who urged the unions to fully cooperate in ensuring the smooth functioning of the university, attributed the dispute to the 'lack of understanding' of university regulations by certain Syndicate members. He also claimed that the Syndicate members do not hold any special administrative powers, and therefore, the employees are not obligated to follow their informal instructions unless official mandated. Meanwhile, Left-backed Syndicate members charged the Vice-Chancellor of violating university protocols and engaging in 'vindictive drama'. They also accused him for locking the Syndicate hall and leaving with the keys, thereby preventing a meeting scheduled to discuss the issue of grace marks for NCC, NSS and differently abled students on Monday. They also alleged that the Vice-Chancellor insulted Syndicate members, labelling them as uninformed and uneducated. They added Kerala University deserves a Vice-Chancellor who is academically qualified and culturally dignified. However, the charges were countered by BJP-backed Syndicate members, who claimed that the Left-aligned members were themselves responsible for the cancelled meeting on grace marks. They claimed that the meeting was scheduled at 10 a.m. It was convened under the chairmanship of the convener of the Syndicate Standing Committee on Examinations. While a few members and staff turned up for the meeting on time, the Left-backed Syndicate members, including the convener, did not take part even after three hours. Eventually, the meeting was dissolved on the direction of the Vice-Chancellor around 1 p.m. due to lack of quorum, they alleged.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Farmers stage protest demanding compensation for land acquired for setting up Bharathiar University in Coimbatore
The protest was led by CPM state secretary P Shanmugam and Coimbatore district secretary C Padmanabhan. Photo by P Sreedhar COIMBATORE: COIMBATORE: Members of the Tamil Nadu Vivasayigal Sangam and the Communist Party of India (Marxist) staged a sit-in protest in front of the Coimbatore collectorate on Monday, demanding a compensation for agricultural land acquired by the state govt for establishing Bharathiar University. Land was acquired for the purpose from 1978 to 1984. The protest was led by CPM state secretary P Shanmugam and Coimbatore district secretary C Padmanabhan. Several affected farmers participated in the protest. According to the protesters, around 916 acres of land were acquired from nearly 600 farmers at the foothills of Marudhamalai to set up the university. However, the farmers alleged that they were not paid appropriate compensation and filed a petition in court. Subsequently, the court directed the govt to pay Rs 160 crore as compensation, but the order was not implemented. In 2022, the Madras high court enhanced the compensation to Rs 400 crore, including interest. Nearly three years later, the farmers are yet to receive the payment. The day-long protest concluded in the evening after the govt assured the farmers that a high-level meeting would be convened to discuss the issue. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 5 Books Warren Buffett Wants You to Read In 2025 Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo Addressing the gathering before calling off the protest, Shanmugam said minister for public works, highways and minor ports EV Velu contacted him over the phone and conveyed that chief minister M K Stalin had discussed the matter. Velu assured that a high-level meeting involving the minister for higher education and relevant department secretaries would be held soon to arrive at a permanent solution. He said the meeting date would be announced within two days. Based on this assurance, the protesters agreed to withdraw the agitation.
The Hindu
2 hours ago
- The Hindu
Bombay High Court says ‘No' to contempt proceedings against CPI(M)
The Bombay High Court on Monday (August 4, 2025) refused to initiate suo motu contempt proceedings against the Communist Party of India (Marxist) for publicly criticising the court's recent observations while rejecting its plea to hold a protest in support of Gaza. On July 25, 2025, a Division Bench comprising Justices Ravindra Ghuge and Gautam Ankhad dismissed a petition filed by the CPI(M) challenging the Mumbai Police's decision to deny permission for a protest at Azad Maidan against the ongoing conflict in Gaza. The court observed that the Indian political organisations should prioritise domestic issues over international conflicts. The Bench pulled up the petitioners for focusing on matters outside the country and said, 'Our country has enough issues to deal with. We do not want anything like this. I am sorry to say that you are short-sighted. You are looking at Gaza and Palestine while neglecting what is happening here. Why don't you do something for your own country? Look at your own country. Be patriots. People say they are patriots, but this is not patriotism. Show patriotism for the citizens of our own country first,' the Bench remarked sharply during the hearing. Senior advocate Mihir Desai, appearing for the CPI(M), told the Bench that on June 13, 2025, his client sought permission from the Azad Maidan police to hold a peaceful protest in solidarity with Gaza, calling for a ceasefire. However, on June 17, the police denied the request, citing powers under Section 168 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) and Section 68 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951. Mr. Desai argued that political parties had historically raised important issues and organised health and education camps. The court noted that the CPI(M), being a registered political party, should ideally be engaging with local civic concerns. 'You are a registered party in India. Your party could have taken up issues such as garbage dumping, pollution, drainage, or flooding. Why are you not protesting on these issues? We are only giving examples. Instead, you want to protest over something happening thousands of miles away and showing concern for Palestine and Gaza,' the Bench observed. Following the court's observation, the CPI(M) released a press note on July 25, condemning the High Court's 'anti-constitutional' observations. It said, 'The Polit Bureau of the CPI(M) strongly condemns the observations of the Bombay High Court Bench while rejecting an application by the party to challenge the Mumbai Police's refusal to allow a protest action against the ongoing Israeli genocide in Gaza.' The note further said, 'While doing so, the court went to the extent of calling into question the patriotism of the party. Ironically, the Bench appears to be unaware of either the provisions of the Constitution which enshrines the rights of a political party, or the history of our country and our people's solidarity with the Palestinians and their legitimate right to homeland. The observations smack of distinct political bias in line with the Central government.' On Monday (August 4, 2025), senior advocate S.M. Gorwadkar urged the court to take suo motu cognisance of the CPI(M)'s press note as criminal contempt. He argued that the language used by the party was an attempt to attribute motive to the judges and could erode public confidence in the judiciary. He cited previous cases, including the one involving advocate Prashant Bhushan, to support his argument and requested that notice be issued to the Advocate General. Justice Ghuge dismissed the suggestion and noted that the Bench chooses to ignore the press note and that the party has been saying that they have the right to criticise and condemn the court's order, calling it unconstitutional, 'that is their opinion', so let them do that.
