SC issues notice on plea over Karnataka ban threats to Tamil film
The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued a notice in the case surrounding the attempted ban on the release of Kamal Haasan’s Tamil film “Thug Life” in Karnataka. The apex court strongly criticized the threats made by groups demanding a ban on the film over Haasan’s alleged controversial statements.
Calling such threats an attack on constitutional freedoms, the court stated, “The rule of law cannot be held hostage to mob threats.” It further remarked that “groups of hooligans” cannot dictate what the public can or cannot view in theatres.
SC stresses free speech and democratic disagreement
“If someone has made a statement, you counter it with another statement. You cannot threaten to burn down theatres,” the bench observed. Emphasizing that citizens have the right to disagree, it added, “If enlightened people of Karnataka and Bengaluru believe his statement was wrong, they can issue a statement saying so. Why threaten to burn down cinemas?”
The court reiterated the importance of protecting fundamental rights even in the face of controversial opinions.
Criticism of High Court’s suggestion for apology
Transferring the case from the Karnataka High Court to itself, the Supreme Court also questioned the High Court’s suggestion that Kamal Haasan issue an apology. “Why should the High Court say ‘express an apology’? That is not its role,” the bench said, expressing concern over judicial overreach.
Certified films must be protected from threats
The bench reminded that once a film has been approved by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), it has the legal right to be screened. “People can choose not to watch it. But we cannot allow threats and intimidation to decide if a film gets released,” the court declared.
To reinforce its position, the court referenced previous judgments such as the “Mi Nathuram Boltoy” case and rulings involving public figures like Imran Pratapgarhi, upholding the value of democratic dissent.
SC reaffirms its role in upholding rule of law
“We are the custodians of the rule of law. That is what the Supreme Court is for,” the bench concluded, asserting the judiciary’s role in safeguarding constitutional freedoms and protecting creative expression from extra-legal coercion.
For all the latest updates, download PGurus App.
- NATO chief Mark Rutte issues 100% tariff warning to India, China, and Brazil over Russian trade - July 16, 2025
- UK regulator raised Boeing fuel valve alert weeks before Air India crash: Safety checks ordered - July 15, 2025
- S Jaishankar meets Xi Jinping in Beijing, discusses India-China bilateral ties at SCO - July 15, 2025
Gandhi – shot dead
Nehru died of Syphilis
Gandhi -2 (Indira) shot dead
Gandhi -3 (Sanjay) day light murder in sky
Gandh – 4 (Rajiv) Blown up
Gandhi – 5 (Pappu) – waiting foro Bull** or Blo**
All of them paid for their own deeds. NO dharma, NO protection.
None of the Gandhis read Mahabharata = Dharmo Rakshati Rakshitah” “Dharma protects those who protect it” or “Dharma protects the protector.”
Ok no problem. Will threaten SC Judges to land in Karnataka & get banged….. no security & no policy cover to Judges
SC cannot give bullshit judgements & seek police security cover.
SC has to uphold dharma & that dharma on its own should protect them. If right judgement are delivered, people will voluntarily come & protect judges.