'No End To Hurt Sentiments In India; Where Are We Heading?' : Supreme Court On 'Thug Life' Film Row

The Supreme Court on Thursday (June 19) closed a PIL challenging the unofficial ban on the screening of Tamil feature film Thug Life in Karnataka, in view of the statement made by the State Government that it has not imposed any ban on the film and that it will provide "full protection and security" for the screening of the film if the producers decide to release it in the State.

However, during the hearing, the Court orally made several pertinent comments, expressing disappointment with the trend of artistic creations being stalled due to protests by groups who claim that their sentiments were hurt.

"We cannot allow this to happen. Just because of an opinion, should a movie be stopped? A stand-up comedy should be stopped?Recital of a poem should be stopped?," the bench asked during the hearing.

A bench comprising Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice Manmohan was hearing a PIL filed by one Mahesh Reddy seeking directions to allow the screening of 'Thug Life', which was not released in Karnataka after certain groups issued threats against its exhibition following the remarks of Kamal Haasan, the lead actor and one of the producers of the film, that Kannada was born out of Tamil.

On June 17, while hearing the matter, the Court had told the State that it cannot allow mobs and vigilante groups to take over and that exhibition of a film which was duly certified by the CBFC cannot be stalled due to such protests.

Following that, the State of Karnataka filed an affidavit yesterday stating that it will give protection for the screening of the film. 

At the outset of the hearing, the bench appreciated the stand taken by the State. Kamal Haasan's Raj Kamal Film International Ltd, one of the producers of the film, expressed satisfaction with the State's stand. The bench then proposed to close the matter, recording the Karnataka Government's statement.

However, Advocate A Velan, for the petitioner, submitted that the State has not taken any action against the persons who issued the threats against the film and that its affidavit is silent about that issue. He pointed out that the Supreme Court has issued various guidelines with respect to mob vigilantism and hate speeches, which the State was bound to follow in the instant case.

The State's counsel submitted that the petitioner was referring to cases where the Governments imposed bans on films and that those judgments are not applicable here as the State has not banned the film.

"We appreciate that..but what you intend to do against those groups which threatened?" Justice Bhuyan asked.

"We will take action. We are duty-bound to," the State replied. He added that the dispute was essentially between the film producer and the Karnataka Film Chamber of Commerce(KFCC).

The KFCC's counsel submitted that they did not issue any threats and only wrote a letter to the producer informing about the protests. "We issued a letter, saying that there was widespread protests and kindly consider issuing an apology," he said.

"Because of this(protests), should the movie be stopped, or stand up comedy should be stopped or reciting poem should be stopped?," Justice Bhuyan asked.

When the KFCC counsel said that the mob entered their offices, Justice Bhuyan asked if they had made any complaint to the police. "You succumbed to mob pressure. Did you go to the police? No. That means you have no complaints against them. You are hiding behind them," Justice Bhuyan observed.

"There is no end to hurt sentiments in India. If a stand-up comedian says something, sentiments are hurt and there is vandalism...where are we heading?" Justice Bhuyan wondered.

The KFCC counsel said that they will abide by any order passed by the Court.

Senior Advocate Sanjay Nuli, appearing for the Kannada Sahitya Parishad, submitted that language is an emotive issue, and sentiments were running high.

"Do you support the unofficial ban on the movie and burning down of theatres? What is your stand?" Justice Bhuyan asked. "The movie can be screened, subject to an apology by the actor. Otherwise, it will aggravate the situation,"Nuli said.

"Where is the question of apology?" Justice Bhuyan asked. "You cannot take the law into your hands. If you are hurt by the statements, then file a defamation case," Justice Manmohan told Nuli. Nuli then said that he was not supporting anyone taking law into their own hands. "Not for any moment we will support any violence," Nuli said. "And you will not obstruct the release of the movie," Justice Bhuyan told him. Nuli agreed.

Senior Advocate Satish Parasaran, for the Raj Kamal Films, said that the statements were not made by any "fringe elements" but by a Minister himself. He said that Rs 30 crores were lost due to the issue.

The bench, in its order, observed that it was not necessary to issue any guidelines or impose any cost in view of the statement made by the State. However, the bench directed that the State should promptly act against individuals or groups who prevent the release of films by threats of violence.

"Now, the State has come up with the affidavit, paving the way for the release of the movie, and Respondent no 5(KFCC) showing collaboration, we find that it would be in the interest of justice to bring closure to the matter. We don't find it appropriate to lay guidelines or impose costs. However, we direct the State of Karnataka that if any individual or group prevent the release of a movie or resorts to coercion or violence, the State shall act promptly by taking action under criminal and civil law, including damages."

The Court also recorded the statements of the Kannada language group that they would not obstruct the film's release.

After the dictation of the order, the petitioner's counsel submitted that the State should be directed to take action against those who issued threats against the film. However, the bench did not pass any such direction, saying that those people are not before the Court and that it cannot issue orders based on secondary evidence like media reports.

What has happened so far?

In the last hearing, the Court expressed serious concerns regarding the ban on the movie. Justice Bhuyan orally remarked about the failing situation of the rule of law.

"We can't allow mobs and vigilante groups to take over the streets. The rule of law must prevail. We can't allow this to happen. If somebody has made a statement, counter it with a statement. Somebody has made some writing, counter it with some writing. This is proxy..." Justice Bhuyan orally told the counsel representing the State of Karnataka. The petitioner's counsel pointed out that the State has not filed any complaint against the persons who issued threats.

The Court also transferred the producer's petition pending before the Karnataka High Court to the Supreme Court.

"Rule of law demands that any film which has a CBFC certificate must be released and the State has to ensure its screening. It can't be that at the fear of burning down the cinemas, that the film can't be shown. People may not watch the film. That is a different matter. We are not passing any order that people must watch the film. But the film must be released," Justice Manmohan added.

"Rule of law is important. State has to ensure that anyone who wants to show a film, that film must be released after it has got a CBFC certificate," Justice Manmohan asserted.

When the State's counsel said that Kamal Haasan chose not to release the film in the State till he resolved the issue with the Karnataka Film Chamber, Justice Bhuyan expressed disapproval of the Karnataka High Court asking Kamal Haasan to apologise for his remarks. "It is none of the business of the High Court," Justice Bhuyan said.

"This is concerning the rule of law and fundamental rights. Therefore, this Court is intervening. That is what the Supreme Court is meant for to be a custodian of the rule of law and fundamental rights. It is not just about a film," Justice Manmohan said.

On June 13, a notice was issued to the State of Karnataka in the PIL by a bench comprising Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Manmohan.

Background

The film was released on June 5, 2025, worldwide except in the State of Karnataka.

Reportedly, these protests are made against the backdrop of the alleged remarks made by Kamal Haasan on the Kannada language, wherein he said that Kannada was "born out of Tamil".

The petition seeks an ad-interim ex-parte order directing the State of Karnataka and other authorities to provide adequate and effective police protection to all cinema theatres and multiplexes in Karnataka that are willing to screen the movie. It has also sought FIRs against those persons who threatened and incited violence.

The petition also seeks an ad-interim ex-parte order restraining KFCC, its office bearers and other organisations from issuing statements or taking any actions that directly or indirectly obstruct or call for a ban.

The producer of the film approached the High Court of Karnataka seeking police protection for the film's release. However, the High Court refused to grant relief, and instead discussed whether Kamal Haasan ought to render an apology for his alleged remarks concerning the Kannada language. Since Kamal Haasan refused to apologise, the film was not released in Tamil Nadu.