‘Thug Life’ Free to Release In Karnataka: Supreme Court Warns State To Act Against Threats, Mob Pressure
The Supreme Court on Thursday closed a public interest litigation (PIL) against the alleged de facto ban on the release of Kamal Haasan-starrer ‘Thug Life’ in Karnataka, while directing the State to provide full protection to the film’s screening and take strong civil and criminal action if anyone resorts to threats, violence, or coercion.
The Bench of Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice Manmohan took note of the State’s affidavit stating that it had imposed no restrictions on the CBFC-certified film and that security would be provided if the producer chooses to release it.
“The State has clarified its position. In light of this assurance, we see no reason to keep the writ petition pending,” the Court said.
Court Pulls Up State, Film Chamber for Mob Pressure
The proceedings were marked by strong observations from the Bench against mob censorship and growing intolerance. “If there’s a threat of cinemas being burnt down, which producer will dare release a film? There’s a lurking fear,” Justice Bhuyan remarked.
Addressing the Karnataka Film Chamber of Commerce (KFCC), the Bench questioned, “You gave in under pressure. Did you even go to the police? You’re hiding behind these groups. Where are we heading as a society?”
In response to concerns raised by Advocate A. Velan, who appeared for the PIL petitioner and urged the Court to issue guidelines to prevent future threats to film releases, Justice Bhuyan noted: “Should a movie be stopped because of this? Should stand-up comedy or poetry recitals be banned too?”
Petitioner Seeks Guidelines, Compensation
Velan, pressing for broader directions, submitted that such incidents were increasingly common, particularly following controversial statements or perceived hate speech. He referred to a previous Supreme Court judgment where the Court held that denial of film release led to market loss and imposed punitive costs of Rs. 20 lakhs. “We are asking for protection of freedom of expression and some deterrent costs,” he said.
Senior Advocate Satish Parasaran, appearing for the producer, told the Court that the film had already suffered losses to the tune of Rs. 30 crores. However, he expressed satisfaction with the State’s affidavit, which stated that the government would not prevent the screening and was ready to provide police protection.
Fringe Pressure or Public Sentiment?
Arguments also touched on alleged apologies extracted from the producers and pressure from groups claiming to represent public sentiment. While the State suggested that the producer had earlier undertaken not to release the film, it clarified in court that protection would be provided in case of release.
Senior Advocate Anand Sanjay M Nuli, appearing for an intervenor group, was asked point-blank by the Court: “Do you support the release or the burning down of theatres?”
Nuli responded: “We do not support violence—not for a moment. They have freedom of expression.”
Justice Manmohan, addressing the wider implications, said, “If it’s just a gimmick or misinformation, file a defamation suit. But you can’t take the law into your own hands. Say it clearly—you will not resort to violence.”
Final Order: No Costs or Guidelines, But Strong Warning to State
Closing the matter, the Court refrained from issuing guidelines or imposing costs, but issued a stern directive to the Karnataka government: “If any individual or group attempts to prevent the release or resort to coercion or violence, the State shall act prominently by taking action under criminal and civil law, including for damages.”
The matter was disposed of with the understanding that the State’s affidavit and assurances had sufficiently cleared the path for the film’s screening.
With the Supreme Court’s green signal, Thug Life can now be released in Karnataka, free from State interference, but under the vigilant eye of the rule of law.
Previously
It is to be notes that on June 17, the Supreme Court had come down strongly against attempts to block the release of Kamal Haasan-starrer “Thug Life” in Karnataka, stating that “mobs and vigilance” cannot dictate whether a film should be screened once it has a valid certificate from the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC).
On June 13, the Supreme Court had issued notice and sought Karnataka government's response on the plea.
Earlier, on June 9, the Supreme Court had refused to urgently hear a plea seeking protection against alleged threats over the screening of Kamal Haasan's film "Thug Life" in Karnataka theatres.
About the PIL
The plea filed by Bengaluru resident M Mahesh Reddy through AoR A Velan sought a direction for the safe, secure, and unimpeded exhibition of the Tamil feature film in all cinema theatres and multiplexes across the State of Karnataka that are willing to screen it, and to take all necessary steps to prevent any recurrence of such intimidation for this or any other lawfully certified film.
It also sought criminal prosecution against all individuals and office bearers of organisations who have issued threats of violence, arson, or incited communal hatred or violence in connection with the release of the film 'Thug Life', and to submit a status report on action taken to this court within a time-bound manner.
"What is at stake is more than just a film. It is the sanctity of the constitution itself, the authority of this court's own longstanding judgments protecting free speech against the "heckler's veto," and the very idea of India as a nation governed by laws, not by mob intimidation. The palpable inaction and effective abdication by the State authorities symptomatic of the systemic failure of law and order, in the face of this escalating crisis demand no less than this court’s decisive action to pull Karnataka back from the brink of lawlessness and prevent an imminent outbreak of serious violence. This PIL is an appeal to defend the core principles of our Republic," it said.
The petitioner contended the current situation in Karnataka, where fringe elements can openly issue threats of extreme violence, dictate terms to statutory and private bodies, and effectively stall a lawful activity of national interest, all the while the State machinery remains a passive spectator, points to a dangerous weakening and potential collapse of the constitutional machinery in the State to uphold the rule of law and protect citizens' fundamental rights.
The State of Karnataka, acting through its authorities has demonstrably and flagrantly failed in its primary constitutional and statutory duty to maintain law and order, to protect the fundamental rights of its citizens from infringement by non-state actors, and to ensure that the rule of law prevails over mob censorship and the "heckler's veto", the plea claimed.
This serious situation occurs within a disturbing societal context where chauvinistic elements have targeted linguistic minorities such as Hindi speakers in Bengaluru with impunity, fostering a climate of fear that now directly threatens constitutional order over this film, it added.
The petitions submits that when "Victory Cinema", a movie theatre in Bengaluru announced its intent to screen 'Thug Life', forces of intimidation struck openly. T A Narayana Gowda of Karnataka Rakshana Vedike (KRV) publicly threatened to "set theaters on fire", while social media was used for inciting a violent revival of the 1991 anti-Tamil riots. Emboldened by the State's inexplicable passivity – itself a symptom of the breakdown in law and order – KRV members aggressively attempted a siege of Victory Cinema, it pointed out.
The Karnataka Film Chamber of Commerce is said to have buckled under this pressure, publicly admitting to imposing a ban due to – a clear sign of the collapse of lawful authority and a testament to the prevailing lawlessness. When the film's producer, Raaj Kamal Films International sought protection from the Karnataka High Court, the proceedings, distressingly, appeared to prioritise appeasement.
"Instead of a clear directive to the State to stop the illegal threats and protect a certified film's exhibition – fundamental to restoring law and order – the discussion reportedly focused on whether Kamal Haasan should apologise to the very fringe elements intimidating him and threatening public order. This effective endorsement of coercive censorship by suggesting compromise with perpetrators makes the High Court pathway currently ineffective for securing justice, compelling this urgent appeal to this Court as the ultimate guardian of the Constitution," the plea said.
This reign of intimidation is a direct, flagrant violation of the fundamental rights to freedom of speech and expression (Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution) and to practice any profession (Article 19(1)(g)). More seriously, it is a calculated attack on the secular fabric and public order of the State. The State of Karnataka, through its concerned authorities through its shocking dereliction of duty, has become a silent party to this undermining of the Constitution, the plea said.
"The failure to use the full force of the law against those openly issuing threats of death, arson, and communal warfare is not just negligence; it is a surrender that effectively hands control to violent non-state actors. This constitutes a profound and flagrant failure of the law and order machinery in the State, signifying a dangerous weakening of the Constitutional machinery's ability to function and protect its citizens," it has further alleged.
Case Title: M Mahesh Reddy v. State of Karnataka