Of course colonialism was bad, but the 'Indians' were also doing it themselves long before the British appeared. The British just, partly through accident and blunder, ended up the top dog in a relatively unchanged system.
And there were some groups of Indians who were particularly brutal. Look up the etymology of 'thug'. The British, for all their problems, were a massive improvement over them.
Anyway, to bring it back on topic: this has created amongst a fair number of Indians a sense of victimhood that has hampered India's development. And it also is partly why they remain in the middle (not neutral) on a lot of issues; but remaining in the middle has its own costs.
It wasn't by mere accident. The British understood very well the political system in India, and placed themselves at the top.
Basically, the point that started the European hegemony in Asia was the battle of Diu. Where the Portuguese defeated several cities and leaders along the eastern African coast and Indian coast.
This disrupted the previous trading system between east Africa, India and the ottoman Empire. And it weakened the political power of local leaders.
But the Portuguese made a mistake that the British and the Dutch didn't commit. The forceful proselytisation of the Catholic faith. At some point, the Portuguese even launched an Inquisition in India.
This made the local population, all across Asia, to be very reluctant to open trade with the Portuguese.
The British understood the error that the Portuguese made. So they didn't care about converting India to Christianity.
All they cared was about extracting wealth from India. And so they did, basically stealing the equivalent of $45 Trillion.
In a way, you are right, the European colonialism was not as evil as the Mongol conquest and rule. But it was still brutal and cruel.
The Europeans for the most part placed themselves at the top of the existing political system. Sometimes by sheer force of conquest. Sometimes by supporting an opposing pretender to the throne.
The Mongols were more brutal, with genocide and utter destruction of cities and kingdoms, as a way to assert full control of a region.
But still, during the British rule in India, they caused several massacres and hungers. And they brought India to fight in 2 World Wars.
Sometimes, western people get surprised on why some Asian people have a positive view on Hitler. The reason is simple, an enemy of my enemy is my friend.
This is also the reason why during the Cold War, India had so close relations with the USSR. Why almost all military equipment India had was of Russian make.
That previous Indian rulers were evil and committed massacres on their population, doesn't excuse the crimes the British did in India.
And whatever good thing the British might have accomplished in India, wasn't for the betterment of their society, it was just to optimize the extraction of wealth from India.
Another issue is the British partition of India, something that still has dire political consequences.
It also doesn't help that for a couple of decades, the West was very cozy with China. Ignoring the conflict India has with China.
The invasion of Ukraine is a big problem for Europe. But for India, it's a problem in a far away place.
Better still, India is profiting from this, as they can buy cheap oil from Russia.
So why should India bother aligning themselves with Western European interests.
It sucks that not all countries will not align themselves against Russian aggression. But a country like India has it's reasons.