Sanjay Dutt says 'no peace in India' was scripted. So who is accountable?

Sanjay Dutt saying his controversial Shekhar Tonite speech was scripted doesn’t really settle the controversy. Not because he must personally endorse every word written for him, or because he owes anyone an apology. But because being scripted does not strip you of the responsibility of knowing what you are saying, especially when you are making a statement about the country in front of millions of people.Dutt has now clarified twice that his remarks about there being “no peace” in India were part of a scripted, light-hearted segment and did not represent his personal views. In his latest clarification, he said he and the others on the show were “performing according to a script” and that the remarks were “in no way” his personal thoughts or feelings. He ended by saying, “Jai Hind, Jai Bharat.”Fine. But then, who is reading these scripts? Who is approving them? Who is actually trying to understand what is being said before it is performed?Because this wasn’t one stray line taken out of context. On Shekhar Tonite, Dutt said, “The people of this country are so lovely. There should be peace here. I can’t feel that peace in our country anymore.” He went on to describe Indians as large-hearted and hospitable, saying “we have given so much”, before saying he prayed to Shivji that those days would return soon.Sanjay Dutt: "Ek peace hona chahiye, I can’t feel that peace anymore in India." But what kind of "peace" is he talking about? If there is no peace in India, then where is it? In our neighbouring countries? https://t.co/IKl8xHK3eJ— Amit Kumar Sindhi (@AMIT_GUJJU) October 3, 2026The segment then moved into satire. Asked what he would do if he became Prime Minister for five minutes, Dutt spoke about staying in India instead of travelling abroad to celebrate, saying there should be a connection between the PM and the people. He invoked Gandhi’s three monkeys and suggested there should be a fourth – essentially asking who would correct something wrong if you saw it. Dutt has explained that the entire conversation was scripted and inspired by the humour and satire of his iconic film Munna Bhai (2003), particularly the idea of “Gandhigiri”, which he says was meant to convey love, warmth, togetherness and goodwill.But that still doesn’t answer the most basic question: what responsibility does the person delivering a script have towards the words coming out of his mouth?We are not schooling Dutt on patriotism. We don’t need him to prove that he loves India. You can love your country without repeatedly declaring, “I love my country.” You can also question, criticise or joke about things happening in the country without being anti-India.And nobody is even asking him for an apology.The point is simply that you cannot respond to a controversy twice by saying, essentially, I was only reading a script, and expect that to end the conversation. Because if the script was so important that it needed two clarifications, it was surely important enough to be read, understood and thought through before it was delivered.A script explains where the words came from. It doesn’t automatically absolve the person saying them of responsibility for what those words mean.That is the uncomfortable bit here. If an actor is merely performing, then the responsibility belongs to the writer, director and everyone who approved the material. If the actor is also expected to stand behind the performance enough to explain it afterwards, then some responsibility inevitably comes back to him too.This isn’t about cancelling Sanjay Dutt or questioning his patriotism. It isn’t even about demanding an apology, but something much simpler: if you are going to say something, scripted or otherwise, you should at least know what you are saying.Because “it was scripted” can explain the words. It cannot make the words disappear.- EndsThe views expressed in this piece are those of the author.