Javed Akhtar

Akhtar sued Kangana Ranaut for defamation following an interview in which she alleged that he had made threats and exerted pressure in connection with her dispute with Hrithik Roshan. Ranaut subsequently brought counter-proceedings.

State of the evidence

Complaints, procedural decisions and mediation documented

Attribution

Direct party to a legal dispute

Akhtar played a public role in the campaign leading to the 2012 amendment strengthening authors' and composers' rights and royalties. In 2025, he recounted that several powerful producers had opposed the reform and that he had been professionally boycotted.

State of the evidence

Role in the reform and retrospective testimony documented

Attribution

Personal responsibility for his public account and role in the reform

A West Bengal Urdu Academy programme in which Akhtar was due to participate was postponed following protests by groups accusing him of having made remarks offensive to Islam in the past.

State of the evidence

Postponement of the programme and protests documented

Attribution

Person affected by an institutional decision following controversy

A lawyer describing himself as an RSS supporter brought defamation proceedings against Akhtar following remarks comparing certain Hindu extremists to the Taliban.

State of the evidence

Complaint, summons, mediation and acquittal documented

Attribution

Personal responsibility for his statements, with no final conviction

Course of the proceedings

1. Formally charged — Formal charge before the current outcome

At an event in Lahore, Akhtar stated that those responsible for the attacks of 26 November 2008 had come from Pakistan and that India was entitled to feel resentment over the lack of an adequate response.

State of the evidence

Filmed statements and reactions documented

Attribution

Personal responsibility for his remarks

During the Karnataka hijab controversy, Akhtar said that he opposed the hijab and burqa but was outraged by footage of men surrounding and intimidating a young woman wearing a veil.

State of the evidence

Public statements documented

Attribution

Personal responsibility for his remarks

Akhtar argued that broadcasting the azaan over loudspeakers was unnecessary and could disturb others, prompting strong criticism.

State of the evidence

Publication and reactions documented

Attribution

Personal responsibility for his remarks

After the Delhi riots, Akhtar criticised the police for targeting Tahir Hussain while, according to him, others who had issued threats were not being prosecuted. A lawyer filed a complaint alleging, among other things, sedition and religious hatred.

State of the evidence

Court complaint and public clarification documented

Attribution

Personal responsibility for the tweet; criminal characterisation merely alleged

During the debate over a possible ban on full-face veils, Akhtar stated that a burqa ban should be accompanied by an equivalent approach to the ghoonghat. Karni Sena demanded an apology and issued threats.

State of the evidence

Statements and public threats documented

Attribution

Personal responsibility for his remarks

Akhtar strongly criticised a fatwa attributed to Deoband clerics concerning women working alongside men. He subsequently received hostile messages and a death threat, and contacted the cyber police.

State of the evidence

Statements, threats and complaint to the cyber police documented

Attribution

Target of a controversy following his own remarks