“Why threaten to burn theatres?” SC defends Kamal Haasan’s ‘Thug Life’ amid threats; warns against mob intimidation

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.

The post “Why threaten to burn theatres?” SC defends Kamal Haasan’s ‘Thug Life’ amid threats; warns against mob intimidation appeared first on PGurus.