Janhvi Kapoor on the AI-altered Chuttamalle video: What she said and how Chiranjeevi responded

Janhvi Kapoor said the reported AI-altered version of her appearance in the Chuttamalle video was “deeply violating, bordering on sexual assault.” In an Instagram Stories statement on October 4, 2026, she condemned the creation and circulation of fictionalised, objectifying content without a woman’s consent. She also thanked her Devara: Part 1 co-star Jr NTR for speaking out, along with Chiranjeevi, Vijay Deverakonda and Khushbu Sundar. Chiranjeevi had already responded on October 3, saying he would raise the issue with Telugu film bodies and propose a support cell for people targeted by such material.

What Kapoor said about consent

The concern centers on a clip described as using footage from Chuttamalle, a song featuring Kapoor and Jr NTR in the 2024 film Devara: Part 1. Accounts of the clip say it changed Kapoor’s appearance to make the footage sexually explicit. Those descriptions should not be confused with the original song, and the altered material does not need to be shared to understand the objection.

Kapoor’s statement focused on the boundary between appearing in a film and consenting to a new depiction. She argued that a woman’s clothing, earlier choices or participation in a performance do not give someone else permission to exploit images of her body. Consent, she said, remains hers to give or withhold. That distinction is central to her response: the issue is not whether audiences have seen the original footage, but whether anyone had permission to turn it into something else.

She placed the incident in a wider context of women having their boundaries questioned in public and online. Kapoor said the threat posed by digitally altered images adds to existing concerns about judgment, objectification and safety. She called for a change in the attitudes that make people feel entitled to cross those boundaries, rather than putting the responsibility solely on women to protect themselves. Her statement ended: “Her body. Her image. Her boundaries. Her choice.”

What the other actors said—and what is still a proposal

Jr NTR condemned the reported edit before Kapoor’s statement and said he would pursue legal action against people responsible for making or spreading it. Kapoor thanked him for taking a public stand, saying that support from someone with a large audience could matter to women who have experienced similar treatment. She also acknowledged Chiranjeevi, Vijay Deverakonda and Khushbu Sundar for speaking against the practice.

Chiranjeevi’s response was both a condemnation and a proposed next step. In a post on X dated October 3, he said degrading, morphed videos should not be treated as entertainment and that people who create or deliberately amplify them should face accountability. He said he would take the matter to the Telugu Film Chamber, the Producers’ Council and affiliated industry bodies. His proposal was for a dedicated committee and support cell that could help affected people, work with cybercrime authorities, seek removal of content and support legal action.

He also urged people not to watch, download or recirculate such videos, even to denounce them, and instead to report them to platforms and cybercrime authorities. That advice addresses a practical problem: reposting an abusive image in order to criticize it can expose the person depicted to a wider audience.

What the statements do not establish

The actors’ public statements establish their objections and Chiranjeevi’s intention to seek an industry response. They do not, by themselves, establish who made the clip, precisely how it was produced, how far it spread or whether a film-industry committee has been formed. Jr NTR’s pledge to pursue legal action is likewise not confirmation that a case has been filed or that anyone has been found responsible.

Kapoor described the misuse of technology as criminal and compared its impact to sexual assault; those are her characterizations of the violation, not a reported court finding in this case. The distinction does not diminish her account. It keeps the confirmed response—her statement and the other actors’ calls for action—separate from questions about the clip’s origin, distribution and any eventual legal outcome.