Latest news with #KamalHaasan-starrer
Mint
13-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Mint
Supreme Court's ‘Thug Life' verdict reinforces cinema's rights. But threat of mob veto still looms
The Supreme Court's direction to the Karnataka government to ensure the release of Kamal Haasan-starrer Thug Life, while expressing concerns over 'extra-judicial' bans, reinforces the freedom and expression and the theatres' right to screen controversial films. But cinemas still hesitate to release such movies unless law enforcement agencies provide effective protection, according to experts. 'The Supreme Court's directive reinforces the principle that freedom of expression cannot be stifled by threats or public pressure," said Tanu Banerjee, partner at Khaitan & Co. 'It sends a strong message that states have a duty to protect lawful film releases, which could encourage similar judicial protection for other contentious works in future." Also Read: Actors ditch urban-centric films for mass-market genres after Covid India has a long history of theatrical releases being disrupted due to protests. This includes Aamir Khan's 2006 film Fanaa, which never released in many theatres in Gujarat after protests against the actor's criticism of the state government's handling of the Narmada dam project. Period drama Padmaavat (2018) faced protests and was banned in many states—the Supreme Court later stayed the state bans. Greenlit, yet under fire The Supreme Court's landmark ruling in the Thug Life case reinforces that once the Central Board of Film Certification has granted clearance, neither mobs nor political pressure should be allowed to override that legal right, said Anupam Shukla, partner, Pioneer Legal. 'This directive reinforces the constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech and expression, asserting that law and order must prevail over the arbitrary dictates of protesting groups. It sets a benchmark. Future filmmakers can now petition the Supreme Court early if local threats emerge." The Supreme Court indeed case paves the way for theatres to take a strong position on releasing films, despite threats of agitation, and similarly empower authorities to deal with the threats in a proactive manner, according to Niharika Karanjawala-Misra, principal associate at Karanjawala & Co. State governments should provide police protection in such instances where there are either threats of violence or protests which might physically derail a particular screening, she added. If threats of violence are allowed to cancel and overthrow film releases, there will only be an increase in such intimidating behaviour, said Karanjawala-Misra. Also Read: How small southern films are defying the odds at the box office Enforcement on the ground is often weak and motivated by various factors locally. A film producer who did not wish to be named pointed out that state governments can still use the 'law and order" excuse to quietly stall releases using their powers under Section 13 of the Cinematograph Act, 1952, and there are rarely any real consequences for those who issue threats or intimidate theatres. Screening hangs by security Gaurav Sahay, founder partner at Arthashastra Legal, said that despite favourable judicial orders, the release of controversial films can still be subjected to real and credible threats from fringe groups, political outfits, or religious factions. Judicial pronouncements often require robust implementation by the executive and law enforcement agencies to be truly effective, Sahay said. There are remedies that a filmmaker can seek if their film doesn't release despite court orders. Alay Razvi, managing partner, Accord Juris, pointed out that they can file contempt petitions against state officials for failure to comply with the Supreme Court's directions or seek compensation claims under the public law remedy for violation of fundamental rights. However, the overreliance on judicial relief could also congest the courts with similar public interest litigations. Ultimately, while this prudential check empowers filmmakers, real-world compliance remains uncertain unless states sincerely mobilize law enforcement machinery, according to Razvi. 'Even with legal affirmation and a valid CBFC certificate, filmmakers and theatres may still hesitate–because threats, protests, or unofficial pressure can make screenings risky and commercially unviable. The ruling is a step in the right direction, but without stronger penalties for those who obstruct releases or clearer mechanisms to protect exhibitors, extra-judicial bans can still thrive in practice," said Aishwarya Kaushiq, partner, disputes practice, BTG Advaya. Also Read: Indian films hold ground overseas despite geopolitical tensions The on-ground release can still fall prey to "mob veto", Kaushiq said. 'What truly enables the release of such films is enforcement through effective state machinery. Proactive police protection, unambiguous support from government officials, and swift legal action against those obstructing lawful screenings can make all the difference."
Indian Express
20-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Indian Express
Despite Supreme Court's green light for ‘Thug Life', film fails to release in Karnataka
Despite the Supreme Court clearing the path for the release of Kamal Haasan-starrer Thug Life movie in Karnataka, the film failed to hit the theatres in the southern state on Friday. The distributors decided not to distribute the film in the state, reportedly due to the poor response and box office collections in other states. The film opened to mixed reviews earlier this month, leading to a poor theatrical run across the country. According to the makers, the film was produced with a budget of Rs 300 crore. After two weeks of its release, the movie is struggling to touch the Rs 50-crore mark in India. Meanwhile, the distributors in Karnataka are prioritising new films, such as Dhanush- and Nagarjuna-starrer Kuberaa and Aamir Khan's highly anticipated Sitaare Zameen Par. The Mani Ratnam-directed Thug Life released on June 5 across India except in Karnataka, where its release was 'stalled' following the controversy over lead actor Haasan's reported remark that 'Tamil gave birth to Kannada'. The Karnataka Film Chamber of Commerce (KFCC) demanded an apology from the actor. Meanwhile, pro-Kannada groups threatened to target theatres if the film was screened, pushing the makers to petition the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed the Karnataka government to ensure the uninterrupted release of Thug Life in the state, dismissing a public interest litigation filed under Article 32 of the Constitution. The court transferred a related case from the Karnataka High Court and closed proceedings after the state filed an affidavit confirming no restrictions on the movie's release. The Karnataka government, in its affidavit, stated that it has imposed no ban on Thug Life and pledged full protection and security for its screening. Senior advocate Satish Parasaran, representing Raaj Kamal Films, expressed satisfaction with the state's stance and chose not to pursue the writ petition further. The bench emphasised that the state must act swiftly against any groups attempting to forcibly disrupt the film's release. 'We should be able to check our emotions. Otherwise, we will be engulfed by them. There is a difference between real life and reel life,' the court observed.
Time of India
19-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Time of India
No SC order on vigilantes, it says state to act against violent acts
NEW DELHI: Supreme Court on Thursday refused to lay down guidelines or impose costs on a vigilante group threatening the release of Kamal Haasan-starrer 'Thug Life' in Karnataka and closed the proceedings, saying the state should act against anybody preventing the screening or resorting to violence. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now 'Thug Life' has not been released in Karnataka yet because of the threat of violence by those protesting against Haasan's remark about Tamil being the mother of Kannada. When the PIL petitioner said it was a state minister who had made a statement to whip up passions, the bench said, "It is unfortunate but after some lashing, the state has filed an affidavit. We hope better sense prevails and vigilante groups will never do it in future. Once the state has corrected itself and understood its duties and taken a conscious and wise decision to maintain law and order, there is no need to keep the matter pending. " When the petitioner continued to press for laying down guidelines to curb vigilante groups' threat of violence to stop release of censor board cleared films on diverse pretexts, state govt counsel D L Chidanand deftly drew the court's attention to the presence of the film's producer, Rajkamal Film International, and requested the bench to seek its view. For the producer, senior advocate Satish Parashar said though non-release of the film in Karnataka had cost the producer nearly Rs 30 crore, it was now satisfied with the state govt's stand and did not intend to pursue the petition, which was transferred to Supreme Court from Karnataka high court on Tuesday. Karnataka Film Chamber of Commerce (KFCC), through Udayan Jain, too said that though it was in negotiation with the producer to resolve the impasse arising from Haasan's statement on Kannada language, in view of the state's stand, it would not oppose release of the film in the state. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now It also questioned KFCC for seeking an apology from Haasan. For one of the intervenors, senior advocate Sanjay Nuli said language was a very emotive subject for the people of Karnataka and the actor should have exercised restraint rather than indulging in such publicity gimmicks on the eve of release of the film. The bench said, "If the actor devised the publicity strategy, you fell for it. You file a defamation suit against the actor, but cannot take the law into your hands."
Time of India
19-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Time of India
SC pulls up Karnataka for inaction, says state must not yield to vigilante threats over 'Thug Life'
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has directed the Karnataka government to ensure that there is no obstruction to the release of Kamal Haasan-starrer film 'Thug Life' in the state. Following the direction, the state assured SC that it will provide protection to the film makers so that the film's release is not obstructed in the state. A bench comprising justices Ujjal Bhuyan and Manmohan also disapproved of the state's inaction in dealing with such threats to free speech . The development took place during the resumed hearing of a plea filed by a Bengaluru resident M Mahesh Reddy , who highlighted that despite having a valid censor certificate the film was effectively banned in Karnataka due to threats by fringe organisations and inaction by state authorities. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Morganville: Stunning New 2-Bed Senior Apartments (Take A Peek Inside) Senior Apartments | Search Ads Click Here Undo The petitioner urged SC to lay down guidelines to prevent such incidents from recurring in future, but the bench refused. The bench made it clear that the state government cannot bow to pressure from vigilante groups . "Just because of an opinion a movie is stopped, a stand up comedian is stopped, a person is stopped from reciting a poem ... You (State) succumbed to their pressure. In such circumstances the state has a duty. Simply saying a ban is not imposed will take it nowhere. You are hiding behind these groups," the bench verbally remarked. Live Events
New Indian Express
19-06-2025
- Entertainment
- New Indian Express
Just because someone's sentiment is hurt, movie, stand-up comedy can't be stopped, says SC on Thug life ban
NEW DELHI: Taking strong exception to criminal elements obstructing the screening of Kamal Haasan-starrer Thug Life, the Supreme Court on Thursday directed the Karnataka government to act against those who create hindrances even as it underscored that a movie, stand-up comedy or a poem's recital can't be stopped simply because someone's sentiments are hurt. During the course of the hearing of a PIL filed by Bengaluru resident M Mahesh Reddy, challenging the ban on the screening of Tamil feature film Thug Life in Karnataka, the apex court made pertinent observations about the way artistic creations are being stalled due to protests by groups who claim that their sentiments were hurt. A bench of Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and Manmohan said, "There is no end to hurt sentiments in India. If a stand-up comedian says something, sentiments are hurt and there is vandalism and protests. Where are we heading?" Does it mean because of protests, a movie should be stopped or stand up comedy should be stopped or reciting of poems be stopped?" The bench went onto say that it did not want a situation to crop up in which someone's sentiment was hurt by utterances and the movie was stalled from releasing, or a standup show was cancelled or an artist was stopped from reciting a poem. The court directed the State of Karnataka that if any individual or group prevents 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 make them pay for the damages. The apex court, after recording the Karnataka government's assurance that it would provide adequate security to cinema theatres screening the film, closed the PIL filed by Mahesh Reddy. Earlier, advocate A Velan, for the petitioner (Reddy), argued that the State has not taken any action against those 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. Opposing these submissions, the State's counsel stated 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. 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 case. The Counsel appearing for RajKamal Film International Ltd said though they had lost Rs 30 crore (in revenue) so far, they had no problems if the state agreed to provide security for screening of the film. The top court questioned the Karnataka Film Chamber of Commerce (KFCC) for seeking an apology from veteran actor Kamal Haasan over his remark that Kannada was born out of Tamil. "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. However, counsel for KFCC said that they did not issue any threats but only issued a letter that there was widespread protests across the state and kindly consider issuing an apology. The KFCC counsel that the mob entered their offices and after that they had issued a letter. Justice Bhuyan asked if KFCC had made any complaint to the police in this regard. "You actually succumbed to mob pressure. Did you go to the police? No. That means you have no complaints against them. You are just hiding behind them," he observed. The KFCC counsel said that they would abide by any order passed by the court.
