Aishwarya Rai

Aishwarya Rai and her family are amused and xasperated by media reports claiming that a clarification has been issued about the supposedly drunken bodyguard’s high-handed conduct at the Pushkar temple last week when the actress paid a visit there.

‘No such clarification has been issued,’ said a very dependable source. ‘Because no incident happened at the Pushkar temple. The entire episode is as fabricated as the priest at the Madurai temple who’s supposed to have seen Aishwarya and Abhishek Bachchan exchange garlands.

‘We challenge the priest to come forward and please tell us when the two exchanged garlands. The Pushkar incident is again an example of the hounding that Aishwarya and her family have been facing throughout 2006.’

Explaining the true picture isn’t easy. But a close friend of Aishwarya tried her best to put the matter into a perspective.

The friend said: ‘Look, Aishwarya has been visiting temples and dargahs for years now. it’s her habit to visit religious places wherever she is shooting. Since Ashutosh Gowariker’s schedule in Rajasthan for ‘Jodha-Akbar’ was over, she decided to visit the temple and dargah before leaving the place.

‘She has been doing the same during all her outdoor shootings. Why is such a big deal being made if she visited a dargah or a temple this time? Why attribute hidden meanings and agendas to such simple and gestures? Aishwarya tried to keep her visit to the holy places as low profile as possible. What can she do if everything she does gets blown out of all proportions?’

There’s much distress among the actress’ friends and family over her constant media-association with Abhishek as well.

Aishwarya’s close friends feel she has been hounded throughout 2006.

‘There’s more to her than whom she’s seeing. She is keeping quiet because that’s her nature. But she’s far from amused by all the speculation about her life,’ said another source close to the actress.

‘Even the issue about someone sending her money in an envelope from South Africa was blown out of all proportions. She had no knowledge of the man or his money. She did whatever the law required. Now nearly two months have passed. When the authorities know who sent her the money, why hasn’t anything been done to question him?’