What Kenishaa says happened
Singer and spiritual healer Kenishaa Francis says her inbox is flooded with abuse and death threats after she was blamed for the Jayam Ravi divorce. Instead of logging off, she’s pushing back. On Instagram, she posted screenshots of threats and said she won’t disable comments because she has “nothing to hide.” Her message to critics is blunt: if you believe she caused the breakup, take her to court and prove it.
Francis, who now says she is in a relationship with actor Jayam Ravi (Ravi Mohan), lays out a timeline of how they crossed paths. She first met him at the launch of her song Idhai Yaar Solvaaro, then had little contact. According to her, Ravi reached out again in June 2024 for professional help, saying he was emotionally and mentally worn down by his marriage. She insists he contacted her only after he had already sent a divorce notice through his lawyer.
She also makes a serious charge: that Ravi faced abuse within the marriage. Francis says what he described to her was more painful than any loss he had faced. She adds that, if it comes to it, she’s prepared to present therapy notes in court—whether or not he agrees. That pledge has triggered a separate debate online about boundaries in counseling and the confidentiality owed to clients.
Ravi, for his part, has posted a long note of his own on Instagram. He describes himself as a survivor of years of physical, mental, emotional, and severe financial abuse. He says he was isolated and kept from seeing his parents, and calls Francis a “lifeline” who helped him step out. These are allegations, not findings, and they haven’t been tested in court yet.
On the other side, Ravi’s wife, producer and entrepreneur Aarti Ravi, has contested the divorce and her husband’s claims. She says she and their two sons were blindsided by his decision to end the marriage and that the divorce notice was issued without her consent. Court papers, as described by both camps, show Aarti seeking Rs 40 lakh a month in maintenance. She has not publicly addressed Francis’s specific statements.
Francis has tried to lower the temperature of the internet brawl while refusing to back down. She says the assumptions about her role in the split are wrong and painful, and asks people to “let her breathe without hatred.” She also pushed back at those invoking “karma,” saying that when the legal process reveals what happened, she won’t wish pain on anyone.
The couple married in 2009 and were together for 15 years before they separated in 2024. In May 2025, both sides filed petitions in family court. The court, according to statements made by the parties, advised them to reconsider their petitions and scheduled the matter for June 12, 2025. Neither party has announced any court order since then, and both have stayed quiet on Francis’s latest posts.
It’s worth restating what’s clear and what isn’t. Clear: a high-profile marriage has broken down, both spouses have made strong accusations, and a third person at the center of the storm says she’s getting threats. Not clear: which claims will stand up in court, what evidence exists on either side, and whether this will end in a settlement, mediation, or a full trial.
The legal fight and the online fallout
Divorces that turn public often spiral into a social-media trial. This one has followed the script: long notes on Instagram, screenshots, fan wars, and a flood of armchair verdicts. The difference here is the volume and the tone—death threats and abuse, which are crimes under Indian law. Criminal intimidation (Section 506 of the IPC) and threats from anonymous identities (Section 507) can attract police action. Platforms also allow users to report threats and doxxing. None of this is legal advice; it’s simply how these cases are commonly handled.
Family courts work very differently from social media. Hearings are usually private, evidence is examined slowly, and judges push both sides to attempt compromise—especially when children are involved. If there’s no settlement, contested divorces can take time. The court can order interim maintenance, decide on access and custody, and call for counseling or mediation. Allegations like physical or financial abuse must be supported with documents, medical records, bank trails, witness statements, or electronic evidence.
Francis’s willingness to place therapy notes before a judge raises tough questions. Therapy is built on trust and confidentiality. In India, though, therapy and counseling don’t sit under one single licensing law. Many counselors come from psychology or social work; others are coaches or healers. In legal disputes, records can sometimes be presented if a court demands them or if the client consents. Critics argue that sharing notes risks breaking trust; supporters counter that if the client’s safety is at stake, the courts should see everything. Francis says she’ll take that call inside a courtroom, not on social media.
There’s also the optics of a therapist dating a client or a recent client. Online, the debate is polarized. Some say it’s a red line; others argue the timeline matters—when the professional relationship ended, whether she was a licensed therapist or a spiritual counselor, and what informed consent looked like. Francis frames the relationship as a bond formed after Ravi had already decided to leave the marriage and after he sought help for recovery.
What complicates this case is celebrity. Fan communities often pick sides hard, and posts can turn into pile-ons within minutes. The spotlight amplifies blame, and nuance drowns. One camp labels Francis the “homewrecker”; the other calls her the person who helped Ravi escape. The truth will not be decided by trending tags or meme counts.
Here’s the timeline, as laid out by the people involved and their public statements, stitched together from their posts and filings described by them:
- 2009: Jayam Ravi and Aarti marry.
- 2024: Ravi announces the marriage is over, citing irreconcilable differences. Aarti says she was blindsided.
- June 2024: Francis says Ravi contacted her for therapy, after sending a divorce notice via his lawyer.
- May 2025: Both sides file separate petitions in family court.
- June 12, 2025: The matter is listed after the court urges both to reconsider and explore options.
Since then, the noise has only grown. Francis is adamant she did not break the marriage and says the legal process will settle the claims. Aarti has held her line, contesting Ravi’s version and seeking maintenance. Ravi says he endured years of abuse and isolation. None of these claims has yet been established in court.
Behind the posts are real people—two parents, two children, extended families, and now a new partner who says she’s being threatened. No one outside the trio knows the full set of messages, bank statements, therapy notes, or photos that will be tested in front of a judge. That’s why language like “alleged,” “claims,” and “according to” matter. They reflect the status of the facts: contested and pending.
As for the demands in court, Rs 40 lakh a month in alimony is a headline number but not a verdict. Courts look at a spouse’s earning capacity, lifestyle during the marriage, needs of the children, and any evidence of abuse or financial control before deciding interim or final maintenance. In many high-profile cases, judges nudge parties toward a settlement that covers support, custody, visitation, and property division. If talks fail, the case moves to trial.
The online harassment angle is playing out in parallel. Francis has posted excerpts of threats, and those messages could be turned into police complaints if she chooses. Actors and influencers in similar situations have filed FIRs or cyber complaints, leading to warnings or arrests. Platforms can also suspend accounts for targeted harassment. Whether or not Francis takes that route, her posts have made one point clear: personal attacks and death threats are not “debate.” They’re crimes.
There’s a deeper cultural piece too. When celebrity marriages crack, the public often hunts for a single villain. That’s rarely how relationships end. Power dynamics, communication breakdowns, money stress, mental health, and family interference can all stack up. Courts try to sort what’s provable from what’s painful. Social media, built for speed and outrage, has no patience for either.
For fans watching this unfold, a few basic checks help. Screenshots can be edited. Anonymous “sources” can be fake. Old clips can be recirculated as new. Courts deal in affidavits and depositions; the timeline and the documents will matter more than any reel. If the case heads into a full trial, testimony and cross-examination—not DMs and comments—will carry weight.
So where does this go from here? Three broad pathways are typical. One, a negotiated settlement that covers maintenance, custody, and a mutual consent divorce. Two, continued mediation under court supervision with interim orders on access and support. Three, a contested trial where allegations of abuse and financial control are tested. Each track can still shift if fresh evidence appears or if both sides decide to compromise.
For now, both Ravi and Aarti have kept quiet about Francis’s recent posts. That silence may be strategic—lawyers often advise clients to stop talking publicly once cases are live. Francis, meanwhile, has chosen the opposite tack: to speak, to document, and to dare her accusers to meet her in court.
There’s nothing tidy about this story. A star marriage is ending. A singer-therapist says she is being targeted. A spouse says she was blindsided and wants maintenance. An actor says he survived abuse. The law will eventually separate the claims from the facts. Until then, the loudest voices on the internet won’t be the ones that decide what happens next.
