A Story That Deserved Sharper Storytelling
Janaki V vs State of Kerala had everything in place: a sensitive social issue, a layered courtroom setting, and a star cast led by Suresh Gopi and Anupama Parameswaran. What it delivers, however, is an inconsistent and confused legal drama that struggles to stay true to its core.
The film follows Janaki, a software professional who returns to her village for a festival and becomes a victim of sexual assault. As her case unfolds in court, Advocate David Abel Donovan, played by Suresh Gopi, steps in—not to defend her, but the accused. What could’ve been a tense and gripping legal battle becomes muddled with mass elements and unnecessary diversions.
Superstar Syndrome Overshadows a Sensitive Story
One of the film’s biggest flaws is its insistence on constantly elevating Suresh Gopi’s character. His lengthy monologues, though well-delivered, often derail the narrative and rob focus from Janaki’s journey. Instead of staying centred on the survivor’s voice, the film chooses to highlight David’s heroism. The result? A courtroom drama that feels more like a political stage.
In what should’ve been Janaki’s moment of reckoning, we instead get grandstanding speeches by David about development, the media, and morality—topics far removed from the actual case at hand. It’s hard not to notice how the film bends to fit the real-life persona of its male lead.
Performances That Try to Save the Day
Anupama Parameswaran stands out as Janaki. Her performance is grounded and heartfelt, particularly in emotionally heavy scenes. However, the writing rarely gives her the room to fully express the trauma and strength of her character. Shruti Ramachandran, as Advocate Niveditha, adds sincerity and control to the courtroom drama, though she, too, is often sidelined.
Askar Ali and Divya Pillai have brief but relevant roles, while Madhav Suresh’s performance unfortunately sticks out for the wrong reasons—his dialogue delivery and screen presence feel mismatched with the tone of the film.
Screenplay Falters Despite Strong Premise
Director Pravin Narayanan seems torn between crafting a socially conscious courtroom film and a throwback to 90s-style legal thrillers. The film tackles important issues like rape, abortion rights, media ethics, and systemic failure—but barely scratches the surface of any one topic. Plot twists feel rushed or too convenient, and some ideas—like the commentary on Article 21 and paternity rights—come across as underdeveloped and, at times, bizarre.
A Note on Pacing and Editing
At over 2.5 hours long, Janaki V vs State of Kerala could have strongly benefited from a tighter edit. Scenes stretch unnecessarily, songs feel intrusive, and the overall flow dips too frequently. A crisp 30-minute trim might have helped refocus the narrative and eliminate distractions.
Final Verdict: ★★★☆☆ (3/5 Stars)
Janaki V vs State of Kerala has its moments. A few powerful lines, a gripping premise, and a committed performance by Anupama Parameswaran give it some weight. But the lack of focus, indulgent writing, and tonal imbalance make it less than the sum of its parts. It’s not without merit, but with a more restrained screenplay and less star-glorification, it could have been a significantly more impactful film.
JSK is currently running in theatres.
Note on the CBFC Controversy
Before its release, the film was caught in a public spat with the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), which objected to the title “Janaki”—a name associated with Goddess Sita. This led to a forced change in the film’s title to Janaki V vs State of Kerala, and bizarre censorship decisions like muting the name Janaki in certain scenes. Ironically, the name continues to be heard elsewhere in the film—including news clips and courtroom dialogues—making the CBFC’s intervention seem arbitrary and inconsistent. It sparked a wider conversation on creative freedom in Indian cinema, and rightly so.