SC Rejects Urgent Hearing On Plea For Protection Of Theatres Screening ‘Thug Life’ In K’taka

Kamal Haasan

The Supreme Court on Monday refused to urgently hear a plea seeking protection for the screening of Kamal Haasan’s film Thug Life in Karnataka, amid alleged threats from fringe groups.

Petitioner Urges For Immediate Intervention

A bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Manmohan declined to list the matter for an urgent hearing and directed the petitioner to approach the Karnataka High Court instead.

During the brief hearing, the petitioner’s lawyer highlighted concerns about safety and law and order due to the film’s release in the state. “There are open threats by fringe elements and they are saying theatres will be set on fire,” the counsel told the court.

In response, Justice Mishra remarked, “Install fire extinguishers,” and reiterated that the appropriate forum for such concerns would be the Karnataka High Court.

Release & Backlash

Thug Life, starring Kamal Haasan and directed by Mani Ratnam, was released across India on June 5. The film marks a much-anticipated reunion between Haasan and Ratnam, who last collaborated on the 1987 cult classic Nayakan.

However, the film’s release in Karnataka has been marred by controversy. Following comments made by Haasan that were perceived as derogatory towards the Kannada language, several fringe groups raised objections, calling for a ban on the film’s screening in the state. Their protests included open threats, which reportedly led several cinema halls in Karnataka to halt plans to screen the film altogether.

SC Advises Proper Legal Route

Despite the escalating tensions, the Supreme Court made it clear that it would not entertain the matter unless it had first been dealt with by the state judiciary. The bench’s directive underscores the Court’s consistent approach of asking litigants to exhaust local legal remedies before approaching the apex court.

This isn’t the first time a film’s release has triggered controversy in India, where freedom of expression in cinema often clashes with regional and cultural sensitivities. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court’s response reaffirms its stand on jurisdictional discipline and encourages the use of appropriate legal channels at the state level.

As of now, Thug Life continues to be screened in most parts of the country, while its fate in Karnataka remains uncertain pending action from the state’s legal and administrative machinery.

(Inputs By Sambhav Sharma)