Madhav Agasti, founder and director of Agasti Mode, completed 50 years in tailoring and men’s fashion design in late 2025. Over the last five decades, he has transitioned from film sets to the highest offices in the country, dressing villains, heroes and politicians with equal finesse.
Agasti started his journey in 1969, leaving home with only a few rupees and the willingness to understand the nuances of his business. After learning in various cities like Gwalior, Delhi, Moradabad and Lucknow, he shifted to Mumbai (then Bombay) in 1973. After a few tough years initially, in 1975, he opened his first store, Madhav Men’s Molds, in Bandra, which laid the foundation of his career.
Over time, the film industry realised his knack for designing characters on screen. From Apne Paraye and Mr India to Ram Lakhan and Karma, his outfits became an essential part of the narrative, with actor Amrish Puri’s Mogambo’s costume in Shekhar Kapur’s 1987 film standing out as one of the most iconic villain designs in Hindi cinema. In due course, Agasti also established himself as a leading designer in political tailoring, dressing former Prime Minister PV Narasimha Rao, ex-President Pranab Mukherjee and other leading politicians across party lines, including LK Advani, Sharad Pawar and Omar Abdullah.
Skilled in the art of handcrafting, he still cuts fabric by hand at 76. In an interview with Forbes India, Agasti looks back at his 50-year journey of craftsmanship and influence. Edited excerpts:
Q. Looking back at your five-decade journey, what gives you the greatest satisfaction?
What gives me the deepest satisfaction is not the number of garments I’ve made, nor the famous names I’ve dressed, it is the transformation that I have witnessed. I have seen how a correctly cut garment can change posture, voice and even decision-making. Tailoring, at its highest level, is architecture for the human spirit. For five decades, I have not just stitched clothes—I have built a presence. When a client stands taller, speaks with more conviction, and feels aligned with who he is, that is my real award.
Q. What was the original brief for Mogambo’s look in Mr India? How did you interpret the character before putting needle to fabric?
The brief was simple but powerful—create a presence that dominates before the character speaks. Mogambo was not just a villain; he was an empire. I approached him like a military monarch… a dictator of his own universe. Before sketching, I built his psychology: Command, theatrical authority, danger with discipline. The costume had to feel ceremonial yet militaristic—not realistic, but believable within his world. I was not designing clothes; I was designing intimidation [for that character].
Q. Take us through the design process for the Mogambo costume—the fabric selection, structure, fittings and detailing.
Structure came first—the silhouette had to widen the shoulders and lengthen the vertical line to create dominance. We tested multiple interlinings to achieve armour-like firmness without restricting movement. Fabrics were chosen for how they behaved under studio lighting, matte enough to avoid glare, rich enough to read power. Every button, braid and insignia was tested on camera. Fittings were treated like rehearsals. We adjusted until the costume moved like authority itself. Nothing was accidental… everything was intentional.
Q. What was the contribution of actors like Amrish Puri and Gulshan Grover to the final look that their characters had?
Great actors collaborate with the costume; they don’t merely wear it. Amrish Puri understood silhouette instinctively. He knew how to inhabit structure. His feedback was physical—stance, arm lift, stride. Grover brought energy and experimentation. Both understood that costume is performance engineering. The final look is never the designer alone, it is designer plus actor plus the character psychology.
Q. When designing for a villain, how did you translate authority, or psychological depth through tailoring? For example, characters like Dr Michael Dang in Karma, Maharani in Sadak and Raja Thakur in Virasat.
Authority is communicated through geometry—sharper lines, controlled volume, disciplined symmetry. Psychological depth is communicated through restraint. Villains should not look busy; they should look inevitable. I use controlled structure, heavier drape, deliberate closures and weight distribution. A villain’s garment must feel like it has some gravity.
Q. Did you do anything differently for a villain as opposed to a hero?
Heroes invite relatability and villains command attention. With heroes, I enhance personality. With villains, I construct presence. Villain tailoring allows more exaggeration in proportion, but the execution must remain precise. Hyperbole without discipline becomes costume; discipline with exaggeration becomes icon.
Q. Costumes made in the 1980s and 1990s featured dramatic cuts and textures. Did the execution of the garments differ due to lighting and camera considerations?
Absolutely. Film garments are engineered for lens behaviour. Under arc lights and older film stock, textures could either flatten or overpower. We adjusted weave, sheen and seam thickness for camera response. Contrast, depth and highlight absorption were technical considerations, not fashion choices.
Q. How has your sourcing of fabrics changed over the decades?
Earlier, sourcing was about availability and adaptability. Today, it is about performance, finish and global benchmarks. Previously, the tailor adjusted the fabric. Today, fabric is chosen to serve the engineering of the garment. Standards have risen, and so has my selectivity.
Q. How did your entry into political tailoring occur? Was it a deliberate outcome from relationships or something else?
Completely organic. One leader became two, two became 10. Political clients value consistency and discretion. Word travels quietly in those circles. I never chased political work… trust brought it to my door.
Q. What are the technical factors of most interest when designing attire for a political leader? What do you believe helps build trust with these clients?
Camera behaviour, crease retention, seated posture, handshake sleeve length, collar stability, microphone placement and climate endurance. Political tailoring is performance tailoring—built for scrutiny and duration. [And for loyal clientele] discretion first, precision second, consistency always. Measurement accuracy builds confidence. Silence builds relationships
Q. When dressing presidents and prime ministers, how did you strike a balance between personal comfort and their office?
The office must speak before the individual, but the individual must remain at ease inside it. I design the structure to represent the institution and the internal comfort to serve the person. When both coexist, dignity appears effortless.
Q. How do their garments maintain structure after long hours?
Internal engineering—reinforced canvassing, tension-balanced seams, recovery-tested fabrics and crease memory construction. A garment must survive the day, not just the moment.
Q. For big events like an oath-taking or a Parliament function, what goes into planning an outfit? Do you prepare options?
Options always, but controlled options. We prepare silhouettes, fabric weights and tonal variations. The final selection depends on lighting, season and the mood of the event. Clothing [for big events] must look timeless on day one and archival on day 100.
Q. You have a reputation for hand-sewn buttonholes and hand processes. What is your reasoning for the continued emphasis on hand processing?
Because the hand understands tension better than any machine. A hand-sewn buttonhole lives with the garment. It flexes, ages and strengthens with use. Handwork is not nostalgia. It is performance craftsmanship.
Q. What, according to you, defines good tailoring?
Good tailoring is invisible engineering that produces visible confidence. It is when proportion, comfort, authority and personality align so perfectly that the garment disappears, and the individual remains unforgettable.
First Published: Mar 11, 2026, 14:43
Subscribe Now