Director Anubhav Sinha has once again found himself at the center of debate with the release of his latest film Assi, starring Taapsee Pannu. Much like his earlier films Mulk, Article 15, Bheed, and Thappad, Assi has sparked conversations around whether Sinha’s socially driven cinema is a form of political protest or simply socially conscious storytelling.

Since its theatrical release, Assi has drawn mixed but intense reactions across social media and film circles. Critics and viewers alike are discussing its subject, dialogue, narrative approach, and performances. While many have appreciated the film’s intention and presentation, others have once again labeled Sinha as “anti-government” or politically motivated—an accusation that has followed him for years.

What is Assi really about?

Assi tackles the disturbing reality of sexual violence in India, highlighting a statistic that a rape occurs roughly every eighty minutes. The film focuses not only on the crime itself, but also on the prolonged trauma faced by survivors—within their families, society, police systems, courts, and their own mental space. Rather than offering sensationalism, the film attempts to portray the exhausting and often dehumanizing struggle for justice.

Naturally, this has raised a familiar question: why revisit this subject when several films have already addressed it? Taapsee Pannu’s Pink famously popularized the line “No means no.” So why does Anubhav Sinha continue to return to such uncomfortable themes?

Is there a political agenda?

During promotions, Sinha himself addressed this issue candidly. At a public interaction, he acknowledged that every film carries an “agenda” in some form—whether commercial, emotional, or ideological. However, he has consistently maintained that his films do not directly target any political party or government, but instead examine social realities that exist regardless of who is in power.

It is also worth noting that filmmakers evolve. Sinha began his career with romantic dramas like Tum Bin and large-scale commercial ventures such as Ra.One. Over time, his focus has shifted toward stories rooted in social consciousness—a change that reflects personal growth rather than political alignment.

Are social films automatically anti-government?

Indian cinema has a long history of addressing serious social issues without being labeled as dissent. Films like Damini, Insaaf Ka Tarazu, New Delhi Times, and Pratighat exposed harsh realities of their times. Yet, they were never widely branded as films made “against the government.”

The same logic applies today. Addressing caste discrimination, minority rights, domestic violence, or humanitarian crises does not automatically translate into political opposition. These are societal issues—often uncomfortable, often inconvenient—but undeniably real.

Why does Anubhav Sinha attract controversy?

The answer may lie in his timing and tone. Films like Article 15 question caste hierarchies, Bheed reflects the migrant crisis during lockdown, and Mulk explores minority identity in a polarized climate. These subjects align closely with contemporary social tensions, which makes them easier targets for political interpretation.

With Assi, Sinha continues this trajectory by focusing on sexual violence despite stricter laws and widespread awareness campaigns. The film asks an uncomfortable question: if laws exist, why does the crime persist?

Verdict: protest or perspective?

Calling Anubhav Sinha a protest filmmaker may be an oversimplification. His films do not campaign against governments, but they do challenge society to confront its failures. That discomfort often gets mistaken for dissent. Whether one agrees with his storytelling or not, Assi—like his previous work—fits squarely within the tradition of socially reflective cinema, not political propaganda.