Nana Patekar’s death has triggered a familiar Bollywood argument: whether the passing of a celebrated actor should quiet the women who accused him of harm. Singer Sona Mohapatra has now made the case that it should not.
Nana Patekar died in Goa on October 8 at age 75 after a cardiac arrest. In the days since, Tanushree Dutta has faced fresh flak for her two-word reaction to the news: “evil dead”.
What Sona Mohapatra actually argued
In a video posted on X and Instagram, Mohapatra said she had no issue with people mourning the actor. What she found disturbing, she added, was the attack on Tanushree Dutta for not matching the public mood.
Mohapatra kept her argument simple: death deserves dignity, and so do the living. She wrote that mourning an actor is one thing, but demanding that a woman who spoke about her trauma simply shut up is another.
“Since when did death erase uncomfortable truths?” she asked. “Old age a virtue? Death = Sainthood?”
Her video pointed out that Tanushree Dutta had described sexual harassment on a film set, fought a long battle and dealt with public humiliation and professional consequences. Now, Mohapatra asked, was she supposed to perform grief for the comfort of others?
The backlash Tanushree Dutta is facing
Much of the online criticism has focused on Tanushree Dutta’s choice of words. Some users argued that Nana Patekar deserved more respect because of his charity and work for farmers and the poor. Mohapatra pushed back, asking why generosity should cancel out misconduct.
She also rejected the idea that philanthropy washes away every difficult question, referencing Jimmy Savile as an example of how public charity does not automatically undo harm. In her post, she questioned a comment that “only one woman” had raised her voice, calling the framing troubling.
Why the moment matters
This is not just about one actor’s death. It is another public test of how Bollywood handles #MeToo accounts when the accused is no longer alive. The argument often moves quickly from grief to pressure: sympathise publicly, stay silent about the past, or be labelled bitter.
Mohapatra’s post breaks that script. Her position is that the public can hold several thoughts at once:
- Celebrate an artist’s work and offer his family compassion.
- Allow a survivor to keep her account of what happened.
- Reject the idea that death or charity automatically erases difficult chapters.
She also called out women who joined the attacks, asking whether humiliating another woman was their idea of engagement.
The broader takeaway is consistent: an actor’s legacy can be complex. Public grief becomes less honest when it depends on silencing someone who says she was harmed. For an audience that follows every turn of these conversations, the line is clear: respect for the dead does not require rewriting someone else’s past.
Source: Hindustan Times
Comments