Stunt actor Vinoth, Rajkamal of Neelam Productions and Stuntman Mohan Raj, after a vehicle owner Prabhakaran, a legal case has been registered, which Raju as Raju as Raju as stuntman Mohan Raj, after the vehicle owner Prabhakaran died in a car accident on the film’s set. This action belongs to sections 289, 125 and 106 (1) of the BNS (Indian Nai Code) Act.

Vikas came on social media as Ranjith’s ‘condolence note’ at the same time in which he expressed grief for the death of the popular stuntman, called him dear and talented. Raju died on the set of ‘Vetuvam’, in which Vishal also acted. The accident occurred on 13 July while Raju was carrying out a car stunt. Later, in an interview, actor Vishal shared that Raju was advised against a deadly stunt, but he ignored the warning.

In his note shared on the X on Tuesday, Ranjith said, “One day the detailed plan, caution, clarity, prayer and all our good will, and all our good will, as it does on every film set, which is at the stages of the crash sequences, ended in their unpredictable death. It has sent all of us to the heart and heartbreak.”

He said, “Mohan Raj Anna was given the value and respect of all of us in his colleagues and crew in the stunt team. He was an experienced in doing stunts, whose plan, clarity and execution trusted all of us.”

The people named in the case are associated with Rajkamal, Neelam Productions, and identified vehicle owners Prabhakaran. The inclusion of these individuals suggests a possible link for production activities. Neelam Productions, known for his significant contribution to the film, now faces investigation along with other accused parties.

The case highlights collective responsibility in ensuring mutual nature of film making roles and compliance with legal norms.

The case quoted in this case – 289, 125, and 106 (1) of the quotes – BNS Act suggests that alleged violations may include issues of security or regulatory compliance. Section 289 is generally related to negligence, while sections 125 and 106 (1) addressed other regulatory violations. The call for these sections indicates the seriousness with which the authorities are looking at the alleged conduct. This has inspired a comprehensive dialogue about the responsibilities of filmmakers and production companies in following legal standards.

The news of the case has inspired the discussion among the internal sources of the industry about compliance with legal and safety standards. Participation of major data like director Pa Ranjith highlighted the height investigation on film production, urged the production teams to ensure compliance with all relevant rules. While the specific results of the case have not been seen yet, its implications are already echoing within the film community. This situation serves as a memory of the importance of maintaining rigorous safety protocols and legal compliance in all aspects of film production.

At this point, the comments of the legal representatives of the parties involved are not coming up.