In a striking development that has sent shockwaves through the film industry, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) has provisionally attached assets worth ₹10.11 crore belonging to renowned Tamil filmmaker S. Shankar, known for directing blockbuster films like Gentleman, Kaadhalan, Mudhalvan, Indian, Sivaji and Enthiran. The action, executed on February 17, 2025, under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), stems from a long-standing plagiarism dispute over the storyline of Enthiran, starring Rajinikanth and Aishwarya Rai. This marks a rare instance in India where a filmmaker’s assets have been targeted under anti-money laundering laws for alleged copyright violations.
The case traces back to 2011 when Tamil writer Aarur Tamilnadan filed a complaint in Chennai’s Egmore Metropolitan Magistrate Court, accusing Shankar of lifting the plot of Enthiran from his story Jiguba. Published in 1996 in a Tamil magazine and later as a novel in 2007, Jiguba allegedly shares striking similarities with the sci-fi hit, which grossed ₹290 crore worldwide. Tamilnadan claimed Shankar violated Section 63 of the Copyright Act, 1957, prompting the ED to investigate whether profits from the film constituted “proceeds of crime.”
The ED’s probe revealed Shankar earned ₹11.5 crore for his multifaceted role in Enthiran - covering story development, screenplay, dialogues, and direction. An independent report from the Film and Television Institute of India further bolstered the plagiarism allegations, highlighting parallels in narrative structure and themes. Concluding that Shankar’s actions breached copyright law - a scheduled offense under PMLA - the agency moved to attach three immovable properties registered in his name.
This isn’t Shankar’s first brush with legal trouble over intellectual property. His upcoming projects have faced similar accusations, though none escalated to this level. The attachment, announced on February 20, 2025, has sent ripples through Indian cinema, spotlighting the intersection of creative rights and financial accountability. As the case unfolds, it raises questions about how far legal protections extend in India’s film industry.