The Disquieting Afterlife Of #MeToo In Indian Cinema

The cultural afterlife of #MeToo in India carries a certain disquiet. Public discourse returns to it in flashes, often stripped of empathy and seriousness surrounding those in the limelight. Even as the rigour behind the movement is met with scrutiny, the systemic failures that made it necessary remain conveniently intact. This unevenness is not confined to one industry alone, but reflects a broader cultural fatigue shaping public response. One is conditioned to read it with their morning tea and move on. For many of those who spoke up, the aftermath has simply been dangerous silence or worse, a cold shoulder from peers, audiences and legal authorities alike.

The recent arrest of Malayalam filmmaker Ranjith Balakrishnan on March 31 for sexually harassing an actor has momentarily revived these conversations. According to the report, he entered the survivor’s caravan during a shoot in Fort Kochi in January and attempted to sexually assault her. This is not the first time allegations have surfaced against Balakrishnan. Earlier in 2024, Bengali actor Sreelekha Mitra accused him of misconduct, prompting his resignation as Kerala Film Academy chairman.

Actor Dileep, accused in the abduction and assault of actor Bhavana Menon in 2017, has also recently been acquitted by a Kerala court after years of legal proceedings. The case shocked the public and led to key milestones in Malayalam cinema, including the formation of the Women in Cinema Collective (WCC) and the release of the K. Hema Committee report. Yet, in December 2025, a Kerala court acquitted Dileep, while sentencing six others to 20 years in prison for assaulting her in a moving vehicle. The attack was filmed and Dileep had conspired with and hired the men to carry it out over personal enmity. “After years of pain, tears, and emotional struggle, I have come to a painful realisation: not every citizen in this country is treated equally before the law,” Menon wrote on Instagram after the judgement. However, the crucial findings of the former judge-led three-member Hema Committee threw up important debates on the atmosphere of impunity that shields sexual perpetrators within the film industries of India.

The Uneven Scales Of Indian Justice

The trajectories of Ranjith and Dileep emphasise how the tedious legal process shapes public memory. In Bollywood too, several high-profile cases enter a prolonged state of limbo as the perpetrators treat it like a hiccup before returning to limelight. Director Sajid Khan, accused by multiple women during the 2018 wave, stepped down from Housefull 4 (2019) under public pressure. No formal charges followed him since. Over time, the absence of legal escalation allowed his return to mainstream platforms, including reality television. What began as public outrage dissolved into endless procedural silence.

A similar pattern of delay and dilution can be seen in the case of director Vikas Bahl. Accused by a former employee of sexual misconduct in 2016, the survivor, a crew member, reported it to Anurag Kashyap, co-founder of Phantom Films. In October, 2018, Kashyap issued a statement detailing his fallout with Bahl and efforts to prevent his continued involvement, leading to the production company’s dissolution. Bahl filed a ₹10 crore defamation suit against co-founders Kashyap and Vikramaditya Motwane. He briefly stepped down from Super 30 (2019), but was later reinstated as director after an Internal Complaints Committee cleared him. The committee, on Bahl’s request before the film’s release, bypassed procedures and did not interview key witnesses before absolving him. His return to filmmaking with an upcoming sequel to his hit feminist film Queen (2013) underscores the irony of it all. 

The Persistence Of “Rehabilitated” Men’s Careers

Multiple women, including singers Sona Mohapatra, Alisha Chinai, Neha Bhasin and Shweta Pandit accused Anu Malik of misconduct, leading to his exit from Indian Idol: Season 9. He has since re-entered Bollywood with Tum Meri Poori Kahani (2025), backed by Mahesh Bhatt, reflecting how powerful men continue to shield and rehabilitate other powerful men.

Director Sajid Khan’s one-year ban following multiple sexual harassment allegations in 2018 was framed as a turning point for reform in Bollywood. Over ten women, including Saloni Chopra, Sherlyn Chopra, Aahana Kumra and Mandana Karimi came forward. By October 2022, he had re-entered the public eye as a contestant on Bigg Boss 16. In April 2025, actor Navina Bole added to these allegations, recalling an incident from the mid-2000s in which Khan allegedly asked her to undress and sit in lingerie during a meeting at his home. Despite all this, Khan has yet again returned to direction with his upcoming horror film Hundred. 

Mahmood Farooqui, best known for co-directing Peepli Live (2010), was arrested after a rape complaint. His wife, filmmaker Anusha Rizvi, repeatedly dismissed the assault and discredited the survivor’s account among mutual acquaintances. In a 2018 interview, she questioned how sexual harassment is defined and argued that men should not be punished over “relationships or dates gone wrong.” She went on to undermine women’s credibility and suggested that such accusations “unfairly harm men and their families”, all while calling herself a feminist. In the years since his acquittal, Farooqui has returned to the screen as a co-producer of The Great Shamsuddin Family (2025), a film that has drawn praise for its tender portrayal of a middle-class Muslim household. Much of the appreciation exists in deliberate separation from the man behind it, as though the work can be restored without confronting the history attached to it.

Similarly, Rajkumar Hirani was also named in a sexual assault allegation by a crew member during the post-production of his film Sanju (2018). Vidhu Vinod Chopra later parted ways with him, yet Shah Rukh Khan went on to collaborate with him on Dunki (2023). What connects these examples is the resilience of male professional networks. Economic and creative considerations often outweigh reputational concerns.

The Consistent Burden And Humiliation Of Testifying

In contrast to powerful abusive men, the trajectories of those who speak up reveal a different reality. Tanushree Dutta became one of the earliest voices of India’s #MeToo moment. Eventually, work opportunities diminished and public scrutiny intensified. In July 2026, Dutta shared a distressed Instagram video, saying she had been assaulted, subjected to dangerous situations and had endured this for over five years. After the video, many dismissed her as a “psycho drama queen,” to which Dutta responded, “People always say such things. They said I was acting in 2008, they said the same in 2018. And who are these people anyway?” 

After writer Vinta Nanda filed a case, actors Sandhya Mridul and Deepika Amin also accused Alok Nath of sexual assault, forming part of a broader pattern of testimonies that did not lead to systemic change. Nanda’s case was dismissed in 2019 for “lack of evidence,” despite sustained legal pursuit and personal cost. Nath later said it was “useless to react” to the allegations, claiming that “whatever a woman says” is believed today, and added that he would not comment further after filing defamation cases against Nanda.

Singer Chinmayi Sripaada, after speaking against prominent lyricist Vairamuthu and actor Radha Ravi, faced professional isolation and ban within the Tamil industry for six years. She criticised Rajinikanth and Kamal Haasan for praising Vairamuthu after he was shortlisted for the Jnanpith Award, drawing backlash online. Responding to trolls on X, she wrote, “Many of you are upset because I called out Rajini Sir and Kamal Sir—I was a fan too. I have the right to express my disappointment in men I once naively believed would do better.” Vairamuthu, on the other hand, has gone on to receive the prestigious honour of the Jnanpith Award.

Voices of Dissent Within The Industry

Amidst this landscape, moments of solidarity acquire particular significance. Actor Swara Bhaskar has been vocal in supporting those who come forward. Bhaskar has said it took her years to recognise that she had been sexually harassed by a director. Without naming him, she described the behaviour as predatory, adding that Indian society often fails to equip women to identify such misconduct early.

When writer and standup comedian Varun Grover was anonymously accused during the #MeToo wave, he denied the allegation as false and elaborated his proof of innocence. However, in an open letter, he highlighted that in the macro perspective, the movement was far larger and more important than his isolated case, shaped by centuries of patriarchy that cannot be dismantled politely. 

Actor Farhan Akhtar, through advocacy initiatives, has highlighted the importance of safer work environments. Through his initiative MARD (Men Against Rape and Discrimination), Akhtar has consistently pushed for safer workplaces and greater gender awareness. During the #MeToo movement, he stood in support of survivors, urging the industry to confront its own complicity and emphasising the importance of listening to and believing women.

The Afterlife Of #MeToo In Indian Cinema 

The angst in those who have suffered in the limelight has not disappeared. Many of the men who were accused have returned to work, some with little disruption. The legal system moves at its own pace and the economy of public attention moves faster. Institutions step in selectively, often only when pressure peaks. A recent example has been Dharma Productions making a statement about Homebound (2025) cinematographer Pratik Shah. Shah was publicly named in an online post by filmmaker Abhinav Singh, who cited accounts from around 20 women detailing alleged misconduct. The production house conveniently distanced itself from the controversy while reiterating its zero-tolerance stance on workplace harassment. It won’t be long until men like Shah silently find work again.

So the question is no longer whether #MeToo worked. It is whether the industry has any intention of changing beyond moments of crisis. For those who bravely came forward, that shift has yet to take place. What remains is a fragmented understanding of justice married to inordinate delay.