On Thursday, June 19, the Indian Supreme Court closed a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking an unofficial ban on the Kamal Haasan film Thug Life in Karnataka. The Court noted that the State Government has assured full security for the screening of the film through an affidavit and clarified that it has not imposed any official ban.
Read also: SC Quashes Madras HC Arrest Order Against Tamil Nadu ADGP; Probe Now Handed Over to CB-CID
"Should a film be stopped because of an opinion? Should a stand-up comedy be stopped? Should a poem recital be stopped?" - Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
A bench of Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and Justices Manmohan was hearing a petition filed by Mahesh Reddy seeking directions to allow the screening of Thug Life, which had to be disrupted due to protests following Kamal Haasan's alleged remarks that Kannada originated from Tamil. These remarks led to threats from various groups, which halted the release of the film in Karnataka despite the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) approval.
Read also: UP Gangsters Act cannot be used as a tool of harassment: Supreme Court
During the last hearing, the Court had strongly reminded the State that mob pressure cannot override the rule of law.
Justice Manmohan stressed, "The rule of law demands that any film with a CBFC certificate should be released… the state has to ensure its screening."
In its affidavit filed on Wednesday, June 18, the Karnataka government said it would ensure the safety of cinema halls willing to screen the film. The court welcomed this assurance and decided to close the case by recording the state's commitment.
However, advocate A Velan, counsel for the petitioner, argued that the state had failed to take action against those who threatened. He urged the court to hold the state accountable, citing Supreme Court guidelines on mob violence and hate speech.
Read also: Indian Constitution: A Revolutionary Tool for Social Transformation, not Just Governance - CJI BR Gavai
In response, the state counsel clarified that no official ban existed and promised that legal action would be taken against anyone who threatened public peace.
"We will take action. We are duty bound to do so," assured the state counsel.
The Karnataka Film Chamber of Commerce (KFCC), represented at the hearing, denied making threats, saying they only informed the producer about the ongoing protests and suggested an apology to calm tensions.
Justice Bhuyan criticised the chamber's passive response:
"You came under pressure from the mob. Did you go to the police? No. That means you have no complaint against them. You are hiding behind them," he remarked.
Read also: Supreme Court Strongly Upholds Bombay High Court Order to Demolish 17 Illegal Buildings in
Senior advocate Sanjay Nooli, representing the Kannada Sahitya Parishad, considered language a sensitive issue but agreed that violence or obstruction of the film's release was unacceptable. Justice Manmohan made a scathing remark on the issue of a forced apology:
"If you are hurt by the statements, file a defamation suit. You cannot take the law into your own hands."
Raaj Kamal Film International, the film's co-producer, represented by senior advocate Satish Parasaran, said it had already suffered losses of Rs 30 crore due to the controversy. The bench took note of this, but did not choose to impose a penalty or issue new guidelines, instead stressing on prompt state action if future threats arise.
"If any person or group prevents the release of a film or resorts to coercion or violence, the state should take immediate action under criminal and civil law, including damages," the bench directed.
Despite the petitioner's request for directions against those making threats, the court declined it, citing lack of primary evidence and the presence of the accused before the court.
The backdrop of the case is linked to the worldwide release of Thug Life on Thursday, June 5, which was excluded from Karnataka due to protests. The producer had initially approached the Karnataka High Court for police protection. However, the high court refused to grant the relief and instead questioned whether Kamal Haasan should apologise for his remarks - a position that the Supreme Court rejected.
Justice Bhuyan criticised the earlier approach, remarking, "It is not the business of the High Court to tender an apology."
Case Details: SRI M MAHESH REDDY v. STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS | W.P.(C) No. 575/2025 & RAAJKAMAL FILMS INTERNATIONAL v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS|T.C.(C) No. 42/2025
