The suicide of 41-year-old Deepak in Kerala, after being accused of misbehaviour, has stirred the society’s moral certainties on alleged sexual harassment. Days before his death, Deepak was accused by a woman named Shimjitha of grazing her body in a KSRTC bus. She posted a selfie video of the incident, in which Deepak’s elbow is seen nudging against her chest. After the clip went viral on social media, Deepak died by suicide, making Shimjitha the centre of a complex question–when an allegation ends in a life lost, whose side are we really meant to stand on?
While the family’s loss is irreversible, the larger discourse has turned tables on the woman, shifting her position from being an alleged victim of sexual misbehaviour to an abettor of suicide. Several people who watched the video claim that the touch was accidental because the bus was crowded.
Shimjitha has been subjected to heavy cyber harassment, including rape and murder threats. A man named Ajay Marar, who contested as a National Democratic Alliance (NDA) candidate from Thodupuzha Municipality, made a video calling for her to be sexually assaulted to avenge Deepak’s death.
Several men’s rights activists, who have been lobbying for a Men’s Commission in the state, have swiftly added this to their list of “false accusation cases” against men by women.
She has been booked by the police for abetment to suicide after Deepak’s family filed a complaint.
To unpack the complexities of this discourse and cut through social media noise, it is important to look at various aspects of it separately.
The primary point of contention here is Shimjitha’s video. While she stands firm on her allegation that Deepak elbowed her chest deliberately, several internet users who watched the video claim that it was accidental. YouTube content creators and Instagram influencers have made numerous reels declaring why she was wrong and how the video has nothing problematic.
Some users also question the lack of expression, asking how a woman can appear so stoic while being inappropriately touched. Some have concluded that Shimjitha was smiling, gleeful that she got ‘content’. These observations have been used to fortify their claim that Shimjitha made the video to insult Deepak and falsely frame him to increase her online traction.
Here, while Shimjitha says that she informed the incident to the police after video recording it, there is no confirmation of the same.
From the time Shimjitha’s first video surfaced, what we must remember here is that judging the veracity of a video to ascribe legal liability is not a task that social media users can undertake. The law requires the police to conduct a primary investigation to ascertain whether there is a prima facie case. This is why it is only after an FIR has been filed that most journalists report such incidents, because then, the man is formally an accused, and the video becomes formal evidence that can be discussed.
Such commentary is especially problematic when the video does not strictly establish the allegation or when it is made without seeking a response from both parties.
It not only blurs the line between allegation and evidence, but also normalises the self-appointment of oneself as a subject expert. YouTubers and reel creators who blame the woman for having “reacted disproportionately” are committing the same oversight themselves by jumping on the issue to capitalise their own traction.
This only adds to social media noise, giving a leeway for misogynists to weaponise the incident against women. Men’s rights activists, on the other hand, will seek to further their blanket claims that all women simply harass men with fake claims of abuse.
Adding to the noise are also conservative Muslim groups who criticise Shimjitha, a Muslim woman, for having breached lines of morality. Cyber warriors of political parties have also picked the case to play it up for their own agendas.
However, while we need to keep social media noise in check, it is also necessary to examine why several women often resort to social media to post videos of public harassment and sexual abuse.
Several women who have come out in support of Shimjitha say that travelling via public transport is a daily exercise in trying not to get harassed. They also cite the hostility of the police and judicial system in handling such cases as a trigger for many women to simply post a video naming and shaming the man– it offers them some relief and perhaps keeps potential perpetrators in check for fear of being outed in public.
One of the examples cited to further this argument is that of a man named Savad, who was arrested in 2023 for masturbating inside a bus in Kerala. The incident came to public attention after Nandita Sankara, who is an actor and a model, uploaded a video on social media detailing the incident.
But in the days that followed, Nandita was cyber harassed and victim-shamed for the clothes she wore, and for what she posted on her personal social media handles.
In 2025, when Savad was booked again for molesting a woman inside a different bus, Nandita told the media that she finally felt validated for going through all the social isolation and trauma for two years.
Women have been taking Nandita’s example to counter those who ask why Shimjitha did not go to the police. They say that despite Nandita having complained, she was put through a social media chastity test of whether she was an “eligible victim”. Savad repeated the crime while he was out on bail as well.
Therefore, there is merit in the argument that women resorting to social media to name and shame their harassers shows the failure of law and order to adequately support them. In Shimjitha’s case, she claims that she resorted to keeping her camera on after she witnessed another woman being made uncomfortable by Deepak.
For now, Shimjitha’s claims remain allegations. But that does not mean that every woman’s experience of sexual harassment can be dismissed as fiction. Neither can their social media posts about such experiences be called disproportionate.
Women shooting such videos has increased now, due to a collective demand from society for proof or evidence. And the social media reactions that follow are often contradictory. Irrespective of the veracity of a woman’s claims, in most cases, she is disbelieved and subjected to cyberbullying.
But there is a need for caution.
Shimjitha, who claims to be a trained psychologist, went a step ahead and analysed Deepak’s behaviour in another video. This is the kind of trap that social media leads people to. No one’s actions within a span of minutes can be used to analyse them.
This episode should also make us debate the necessity to blur the faces of perpetrators in such situations.
What seems to have created so much outrage, though, is the extreme reality that Deepak is no more. Since he can no longer give his side of the argument, and given the nature of the video, he gets the benefit of the doubt.
As stated in the beginning, Deepak’s unfortunate death has stirred society’s moral certainties about sexual misconduct, leaving us with the question of who warrants support here. This has also become a point of feminist introspection on how to defend gender justice from being attacked, based on a single incident.
As feminists (most of us are, even if we claim otherwise), who believe in equality, we must now allow the police to do their work. Deepak’s family’s loss is big, and their grief needs closure legally.
But at the same time, jumping to conclusions will only skew the debate into hot takes based on where the commentator’s personal compass lies. Women indeed face sexual harassment while they travel using public transport, and when they try to speak about it, they are widely slut shamed and isolated.
Ambiguity in the facts of one incident cannot become a vehicle to negate this reality.
While social media debates inform and embolden our socio-political understanding, it is pertinent for us to exercise restraint when required. Not all issues need immediate reactions, because some issues warrant careful analysis and sensitivity.
In the absence of any evidence regarding premeditation or intent to cause the man’s death, pushing her to a corner may also cause Shimjitha to crumble under pressure. While social media commentators defend Deepak’s right, it is equally important to ensure that the debate does not push the woman to take drastic steps.
And many women who are watching these exchanges, who may have gone through harassment in public places, may also feel anxious to come out with their testimonies.
Views expressed are the author's own.