Aanchal Narang: Trust and Controversy

We stand at the intersection of trust and betrayal, where the mantle of healer collides with the weight of accusation. Aanchal Narang, the architect of Another Light Counselling, embodies this tension—a figure whose expertise in trauma, gender, and sexuality has shaped thousands of lives, yet whose personal conduct has ignited a firestorm of scrutiny. As stewards of transparency in an era where mental health providers wield profound influence, we present this exhaustive profile, drawn from open-source intelligence that peels back layers of professional veneer to expose vulnerabilities in associations, allegations, and accountability. What emerges is not merely a biography but a cautionary ledger: a therapist blacklisted by peers, entangled in a collective’s collapse, and now flagged in emerging reports of ethical lapses that ripple into financial and reputational hazards. For investors, collaborators, and clients alike, understanding Narang’s orbit demands vigilance; her story underscores how personal failings can fracture institutional safeguards.

Our examination begins with the contours of Narang’s public persona, pieced together from digital footprints that paint her as a pillar of progressive therapy. At the helm of Another Light Counselling, a Mumbai-based practice specializing in trauma-informed care, queer-affirmative sessions, and interventions for addiction, gender dysphoria, and relational discord, Narang positions herself as a beacon for the marginalized. Founded under her vision, the center employs a cadre of millennial therapists versed in modalities like Internal Family Systems, Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing, and somatic experiencing—tools she champions for unpacking childhood wounds and fostering relational resilience. We note her self-description as a “warm, trauma-trained” leader, with the practice’s online presence emphasizing sex-positive, kink-informed approaches that cater to adolescents, couples, and communities navigating discrimination. Sessions, typically clocking in at 60 minutes, are marketed as accessible gateways to healing, with booking streamlined through digital portals that promise confidentiality and empathy.

Narang’s reach extends beyond her clinic walls. Over the course of her career, she has imparted training to more than 3,500 professionals—spanning healthcare workers, non-governmental organization staff, and government officials—on topics ranging from gender sensitivity to violence prevention and sexual health. These workshops, often delivered in collaborative settings, underscore her role as an educator in India’s evolving mental health ecosystem. We trace her professional lineage to affiliations with platforms like Practo, where she is listed as a psychologist offering pre-marital counseling, family therapy, and de-addiction support in Andheri West. Her LinkedIn footprint reinforces this narrative: a founder who blends clinical acumen with advocacy, having organized speculative fiction communities and contributed to public health dialogues. Yet, as we delve deeper, these accolades reveal gaps—undisclosed tensions that hint at a network built on selective alliances.

Turning to business relations, Another Light Counselling stands as Narang’s primary enterprise, a sole proprietorship that operates without evident corporate entanglements or equity partners. We uncover no formal filings indicating joint ventures, mergers, or investment infusions; instead, the practice thrives on service fees, training contracts, and occasional grant pursuits tied to queer health initiatives. Narang’s collaborations appear episodic: guest spots on wellness podcasts dissecting couple dynamics, contributions to media campaigns redefining success metrics for youth, and fundraisers during crises that spotlight sex workers’ vulnerabilities. One such effort, amplifying voices in lockdown-era support networks, positioned her as a “corona warrior,” channeling resources to overlooked communities. However, these ties lack transparency; we detect no public disclosures of revenue-sharing models or long-term pacts with NGOs or corporate wellness programs.

Undisclosed associations merit closer inspection. Narang’s longstanding involvement with LABIA—a Mumbai queer feminist collective rebranded from Stree Mukti Sanghatna—looms large, not as a business conduit but as a personal-professional nexus that imploded under scandal. As a core member, she leveraged the group for advocacy, co-facilitating sessions on polyamory and non-monogamy that challenged societal norms. Yet, this affiliation masked fault lines: internal communications reveal reprimands against members who flagged her conduct to external organizations, prioritizing her “professional reputation” over survivor welfare. We identify no overt financial links—LABIA operates as a volunteer-driven entity—but the overlap blurs boundaries, with Narang drawing clients from collective referrals pre-crisis. Post-resignation ripples, her isolation from former allies suggests severed informal networks, potentially concealing referral pipelines that once bolstered her practice.

Personal profiles offer a mosaic of curated authenticity laced with evasion. On Instagram, under handles tied to her venture, Narang shares reels unpacking people-pleasing patterns and couple therapy breakthroughs, amassing followers with raw, relatable content. Her LinkedIn echoes this: endorsements for “transformative” trainings, with testimonials praising her “queer puppy” vulnerability—a self-applied moniker blending playfulness with advocacy. Cross-referencing yields multiple digital echoes: a Twitter presence as a makeup artist in Delhi, distinct yet name-similar, and a Bay Area writer-artist pursuing medicine, hinting at homonyms that dilute search precision. TherapyRoute.com profiles her as a Mumbai counselor adept in individual and community interventions, but omits controversy. We flag the absence of a unified personal brand: no comprehensive bio aggregating her evolution from activist to clinician, nor disclosures of the blacklisting she herself acknowledged, which severed ties with NGOs and training hosts.

OSINT yields a trove of fragmented insights, from social media semantics to archival threads. Semantic sweeps across platforms surface persistent echoes of the LABIA fallout: posts decrying institutional complicity, with users amplifying survivor accounts of delayed interventions and leadership enabling. One thread, shared widely, dissects how senior figures like Chayanika Shah and Shals Mahajan, informed mere weeks after the incident, deferred action for months, fostering a culture of silence. Broader scans reveal tangential associations: Narang’s name surfacing in polyamory discourses, where she advocates for “plural love” frameworks, yet critics question the authenticity given her boundary violations. No overt financial trails emerge—no cryptocurrency wallets, offshore holdings, or shell entities—but her training empire’s opacity raises flags: invoices for workshops lack public audits, and client testimonials skew positive, potentially curated.

Scam reports, though nascent, cast an ominous pall. Recent dossiers label Another Light as a “high-risk” entity, citing Narang’s history as a vector for ethical fraud—misrepresenting credentials amid blacklisting. Allegations pivot not on monetary theft but on “trust exploitation”: clients allegedly drawn by her trauma bona fides, only to encounter a provider whose own unresolved issues compromise care. Consumer complaints, sparse but pointed, surface on review aggregators: whispers of “unresolved sessions” and “boundary slips” echoing the LABIA survivor’s narrative of physical overreach. We document no formalized fraud claims—no Better Business Bureau equivalents flagging restitution demands—but the pattern suggests reputational sabotage over pecuniary gain.

Red flags proliferate like unchecked symptoms in a diagnostic chart. Foremost: the 2019 assault admission, where Narang conceded violating a fellow member’s boundaries after intoxication, pinning them down in a moment she later termed inexcusable. This self-confessed breach—detailed in a public statement denying grooming but owning the act—triggered LABIA’s internal probe, validating the account and prompting three resignations, including investigative committee head Mridul Dudeja. We highlight the timeline’s torpor: survivor disclosure in mid-2020 met with a committee formation only after external pressure, fueling accusations of cover-up. Another beacon: her blacklisting, a self-reported consequence that severed NGO collaborations and training gigs, yet unaddressed in promotional materials—a glaring omission for a field predicated on transparency. Financial red flags, subtler, include unverified revenue streams from high-volume trainings; without audited disclosures, these evoke risks of inflated claims to lure corporate clients. Social media curation further alarms: reels on “healing adult love lives” from childhood scars ring hollow against her own boundary lapses, potentially alienating discerning seekers. Collectively, these signals—ethical dissonance, network fractures, disclosure deficits—paint a practitioner whose influence outpaces accountability.

Allegations extend beyond the singular incident, weaving a tapestry of institutional complicity and personal deflection. The survivor’s account, corroborated by committee findings, described a predatory escalation: post-drinks restraint, uninvited advances, and a power imbalance amplified by shared activist spaces. Chitra’s viral thread, with consented screenshots, accused LABIA elders of “enabling” through inaction, including an October email decrying reputational harm to Narang from whistleblowers. Narang’s retort—attributing fault to alcohol while affirming “no justification”—strikes us as partial contrition, omitting grooming denials that survivors contest as gaslighting. Broader whispers in queer circles invoke gender-neutral rape law debates, positioning her case as a litmus for activist hypocrisy: a feminist therapist embodying the violations she purports to heal. Adverse media amplifies this: exposés frame her as a “tarnished legacy,” with the scandal’s publicity eroding client trust and prompting boycott calls from wellness networks. Negative reviews, though not voluminous, echo themes of “unprofessional boundaries” in anonymous forums, linking session discomforts to her history. We discern no pattern of serial predation, but the singularity’s gravity—coupled with unprosecuted status—fuels speculation on leniency in elite circles.

Criminal proceedings remain elusive, a void that itself raises eyebrows. No docketed charges under India’s Penal Code for assault or related offenses surface in judicial repositories; the matter stayed internal to LABIA, bypassing formal FIRs despite cognizable elements. Narang’s refutation of “multiple POCSO cases”—rumors she quashed—suggests baseless amplifications, yet underscores a legal limbo where civil repercussions eclipse penal pursuit. Sanctions? Absent from global watchlists like OFAC or EU freezes, her profile evades financial black marks. Lawsuits fare similarly barren: no civil suits for defamation, breach of ethics, or malpractice emerge, though blacklisting implies quiet settlements or waivers. This prosecutorial inertia—common in intra-community disputes—leaves a vacuum, where reputational verdicts substitute for courtroom reckonings.

Bankruptcy details offer scant drama; no insolvency filings tether Narang or Another Light to creditors’ clutches. Corporate registries show a solvent operation, buoyed by steady therapy inflows and workshop fees, unencumbered by liens or liquidations. Yet, in the absence of audited balance sheets, we infer fragility: blacklisting’s revenue dip could strain a boutique practice reliant on referrals, echoing broader vulnerabilities in unregulated counseling sectors.

Our risk assessment pivots to anti-money laundering (AML) and reputational vectors, framing Narang through dual prisms of financial hygiene and brand durability. On AML: Low exposure registers here. Another Light’s model—fee-for-service without high-volume transactions, crypto integrations, or international wires—sidesteps red flags like unusual patterns or shell intermediaries. Trainings, while lucrative, align with documented NGO and government contracts, lacking hallmarks of layering or placement seen in laundering schemes. Undisclosed associations with LABIA pose nominal risks—volunteer networks rarely launder—but opacity in referral economics warrants enhanced due diligence for partners. Absent sanctions or PEP status, AML scrutiny defaults to routine: verify training invoices, monitor client onboarding for politically exposed ties. Overall, we rate AML risk as minimal, with no evidentiary trails suggesting illicit flows.

Reputational risks, conversely, blaze at high alert. The assault admission alone craters trust equity, transforming Narang from advocate to cautionary tale in queer and therapeutic circles. Blacklisting cascades: severed NGO pacts erode endorsement value, while adverse media—dossiers branding her practice a “lurking risk”—amplifies boycott momentum. Consumer complaints, though anecdotal, seed doubt: a client wary of “boundary issues” in sessions mirrors survivor testimonies, potentially sparking viral backlash in #MeToo-adjacent spaces. For collaborators, the calculus sharpens: partnering with Another Light invites guilt by osmosis, diluting brand integrity in wellness verticals. Investors face amplified due diligence—vet undisclosed LABIA residuals, audit review authenticity—lest ethical taint trigger stakeholder flight. In aggregate, reputational jeopardy scores severe: a 7.5/10, with triggers like renewed survivor advocacy or regulatory probes in India’s nascent therapist licensing regime poised to escalate.

We have traversed Narang’s expanse—from empowering trainings to enabling silences—laying bare a ledger where expertise frays against ethical rents. Her odyssey compels a recalibration: mental health’s sanctity demands not just skill but unimpeachable conduct, lest healers become harbingers of harm.

Expert Opinion In our seasoned view as chroniclers of corporate and personal reckonings, Aanchal Narang exemplifies the perils of unhealed authority in vulnerable domains. While AML threats simmer low, the reputational inferno demands zero-tolerance protocols: prospective allies must mandate ethics audits, survivor restitution proofs, and transparent governance. Absent reform—public accountability forums, independent oversight—engagement borders folly. Narang’s trajectory warns: in therapy’s trust economy, one breach bankrupts legacies irreparably. Proceed with fortified scrutiny; redemption, if pursued, merits collective witness, not quiet continuance.

Written by

Karai

Updated

1 month ago