Rapper Vedan performs at govt event in Idukki
Kochi: Rapper
Hirandas Murali
, popularly known as Vedan, performed before a huge crowd at the venue of 'Ente Keralam' expo in
on Monday evening.
In the backdrop of the controversy following Vedan's arrest, in connection with a ganja seizure case and another case regarding alleged possession of a pendant with leopard teeth, police arranged special security for the show.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
He performed before a packed audience at Vazhathoppu School ground, where the seating capacity was around 80,000.
During the show, he urged people to avoid being influenced by 'certain aspects' of his. "Avoid being influenced by certain aspects of Vedan. I had no one to guide me. I grew up alone," he said. He thanked the audience and govt for their support.
Vedan's musical show was originally scheduled on April 29 as part of the expo, marking state govt's fourth anniversary celebration.
However, after his arrest on April 28, Idukki district administration cancelled his show.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
3 days ago
- Time of India
From protest to performance?
While Vedan's raw, politically charged rap resonates with a disaffected generation, his rise has been shadowed by allegations, contradictions, and persistent doubts about whether his rebellion is more aesthetic than ideological. As his popularity soars, deeper questions surface: Is he an authentic voice of resistance channelling marginalised realities, or a commercially packaged rebel crafted for audiences more interested in vibe than message? As crowds pack his shows and songs go viral, Vedan's ascent is entangled in questions of authenticity and ethics. What began as a raw cultural rupture now risks becoming a spectacle, one whose energy might ultimately undermine the very politics it emerged from. As his music, image, and voice become increasingly marketable, Vedan and those around him must now confront a critical question: Is the rapper still defending the vulnerable, or has he become a curated mask—a performance that dilutes the politics he once embodied? This tension is sharpened by serious allegations of sexual harassment that surfaced against him. These claims shook the cultural space that had celebrated Vedan as a symbol of resistance. While no legal resolution has followed, the number and nature of the testimonies have forced many to reconsider their engagement with his work. Feminist scholar Dr J Devika is unequivocal: The allegations must be addressed seriously and without delay. 'We can support him when he speaks for the marginalised, but we must also confront the complaints against him; these two tasks are not contradictory. Ignoring them only risks fresh offences,' she said. She also criticized the society's long-standing reluctance to face the darker sides of its celebrated cultural figures. 'Since the era of poet Changampuzha, we have often refused to believe uncomfortable truths. Facing these realities—and holding even our icons accountable—will protect many women,' Devika said. Critics like writer and actor Joy Mathew argue that Vedan's interventions remain largely symbolic. 'I don't see his rap as a movement for the upliftment of the oppressed,' Mathew says. 'If he were socially engaged and committed, he would speak about pressing issues such as the ASHA workers' protests or the tribal 'Kudil Ketti' agitation. Only interventions like those can be called political.' According to Mathew, most young people are drawn to Vedan's shows not for the depth of political content, but for the musical format and spectacle. In his view, Vedan lacks a meaningful understanding of the real struggles faced by Dalits and other marginalised communities, and his songs reflect neither a clear political vision nor a coherent philosophy. 'Political parties are now backing him for their own electoral gains,' he said. 'It wouldn't be surprising if CPM fields him as a candidate in future elections — but that would mark the end of his journey as a musician.' There is also growing unease about Vedan's approach to caste in his music. While he has said he doesn't want to 'sell caste for money,' critics point to the monetisation of his identity—his stage persona, his branding, and his imagery. With merchandise, ticketed shows, and curated social media campaigns, many fear that Vedan's politics have been swallowed by the logic of the spectacle. Yet Dalit thinkers like Sunny M Kappikkadu offer a more layered reading. 'If upper-caste actors and writers have long gained commercially from their social capital, why not Vedan?' he asks. However, Kappikkadu acknowledges that the sexual harassment allegations can't be ignored. For him, the real issue is not whether Vedan profits, but whether he reflects and refines himself. 'He bears responsibility—as an artist shaping social discourse. Flaws are human. But learning is necessary.' At the same time, he urges listeners to consider the global scope of Vedan's artistic references—ranging from Ambedkar and Ayyankali to Jaffna, Gaza, and the plight of children in Somalia. To truly understand Vedan, he says, one must first understand the pain of his personal history—a life marked by exile, orphanhood, and systemic exclusion. Despite his polarising image, Vedan's cultural traction is undeniable. His work cuts across caste, class, and religious boundaries. Political parties are increasingly eager to harness that appeal. But this popularity brings its own risks. As his voice becomes a tool for electoral mobilisation, the possibility of dilution—of becoming a 'brand' rather than a boundary-pusher—grows more real. Activists like Geethanandan of the Adivasi Gothra Mahasabha, however, take a more forgiving stance. For him, Vedan's music itself is a form of service. 'He sings of liberation. That's enough,' he says. Yet even this generous view raises larger questions: What happens when rebellion becomes routine? When protest becomes programmed? Vedan stands at a critical juncture—not just as an artist, but as an idea. His persona may have begun as a rejection of insult, a defiant claim to selfhood. But symbols have lifespans. Vedan—and his fans—must now confront the possibility that his image is becoming a hollow echo, a false representation that no longer protects but distracts. In doing so, they must ask: Is this still resistance, or has it become its own trap? Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Disclaimer Views expressed above are the author's own.
The Hindu
18-06-2025
- The Hindu
Preferential treatment raises eyebrows
The Kerala Forest Department's recent move to approach the Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change for a one-time amnesty for people possessing wildlife trophy in the State has reignited a debate over the department's alleged preferential treatment of wildlife offenders. The department has pushed a proposal for 'granting another chance to declare wild animal articles and trophies under Section 40 of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972'. The justification for moving the proposal to the State Board for Wildlife was to offer an opportunity for the legal heirs of those who inherited wildlife trophy from their ancestors with valid ownership certificates. Senior officials noted that there had been several instances of the legal heirs failing to get the inherited wildlife trophy declared in their names on time for various reasons. Section 40 of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, prescribes that 'every person having the control, custody or possession of any animal article, trophy or uncured trophy of captive animals specified in Schedule I shall declare to the Chief Wildlife Warden or the Authorised Officer within 30 days from the commencement of the Act.' Illegal possession of a wildlife trophy can result in imprisonment for three to seven years and a fine of not less than ₹25,000. Although forest officials argued that the beneficiaries of the proposed scheme would be legal heirs of those with the rightful ownership certificates — and that the Union government should take a call on the request — the move brought back to discussion the conflicting stands taken by the department in the case of actor Mohanlal and popular Malayalam rapper Vedan (V. M. Hiran Das), both booked for illegal possession of wildlife trophy. Officials asserted that the proposal had nothing to do with any of the wildlife crime cases currently being pursued in courts, but this has set tongues wagging. When the department took a benevolent approach to Mohanlal, who was reportedly found in possession of two pairs of ivory fixed on a mirror stand a few years ago, it went tough on Vedan, who was found wearing a chain with a pendant allegedly made from a leopard tooth. While it took an Income Tax Department raid for the department to know about the actor's alleged possession of ivory, a criminal case was booked by police for alleged possession of ganja, paving the way for the action against Vedan. The department wasted no time in arresting the rapper, whereas it reportedly handled the case of Mohanlal with kid gloves. Vedan told officials that the leopard tooth was a gift from an admirer and that he was unaware of the legal intricacies. Incidentally, both cases were booked at the Malayattoor Forest Range office and registered at the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Perumbavoor. The department chose not to remove the mirror studded with two sets of fully developed ivory to its strongroom or the State Treasury, where the material objects involved in court cases are stored. Though not illegal to leave the material objects, which are difficult to transport, with the accused after completing the legal formalities, questions on possible destruction of evidence by the accused were raised in this case. The alleged haste with which the department acted in Vedan's case received widespread condemnation from the public and those who had earlier led the State Forest Department. There was criticism that the department chose to ignore the alleged use of similar pendants by two other Malayalam movie actors, including a Union Minister. Urgent need 'Great injustice to Vedan. Nobody can be duped by a fake elephant tusk. But anybody can get confused with a tiger/leopard tooth with that of another similar animal. What a shame, especially considering the fact that the much-discussed elephant tusk case was also dealt with in the same Forest Range Office,' noted Gopinath Vallilil, a former Head of Forest Force, Kerala, in his social media account. Preferential treatment for the mighty would undermine the foundation of the rule of law and public trust in the system. The discriminatory treatment meted out to the two accused in the wildlife crime cases calls for balanced handling of the cases to earn and consolidate public trust and fair dispensation of justice.
The Hindu
13-06-2025
- The Hindu
Kerala to seek amnesty scheme for declaring wildlife trophy
Kerala would approach the Union government to provide another chance for people to declare wild animal articles and trophy in their custody. The last opportunity fixed by the Union government for individuals to declare the wildlife trophy in their possession had expired on October 18, 2003. Section 40 of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 mandates that 'every person having the control, custody or possession of any animal article, trophy or uncured trophy of captive animals specified in Schedule I shall declare to the Chief Wildlife Warden or the Authorised Officer within thirty days from the commencement of the Act.' There have been several instances in the State where the legal heirs of people with valid ownership certificates of wild trophy could not get them declared in their names. Several of them have approached the department seeking one more opportunity for the declaration of such items, according to the State Forest department. On conviction of the offence related to any animal specified in Schedule I or meat of any such animal or animal article, trophy or uncured trophy derived from such animal, the convict shall be awarded a jail term from three to seven years and a fine not less than ₹25,000. Only those wildlife trophy inherited by the legal heirs of people with a valid ownership license issued by the Forest department will be eligible for the amnesty scheme, sources indicated. The State Board for Wildlife will consider the proposal next week. The power to provide the amnesty vests with the Union Ministry for Environment, Forest and Climate Change. The State board may request the Central government to take suitable action on the matter in real and genuine cases, sources said. The issue of illegal possession of wildlife trophy had hit the headlines recently with the State Forest department taking popular rapper Vedan into custody after it was alleged that he wore a pendant made out of a tiger tooth in a chain. Actor Mohanlal is fighting legal cases in the State after being booked for alleged illegal possession of two pairs of ivory. The alleged illegal possession surfaced following a raid by the Income Tax department at the Kochi residence of the actor. An appeal filed by the actor against the order of a trial court rejecting his discharge petition in the case is pending before the Kerala High Court. Petitions challenging the reported inaction of the Forest department to book the actor for the alleged possession of 13 ivory idols and granting of owner certificate to the two sets of ivory are also pending before the High Court.
