Bengaluru Court Gags Kamal Haasan from Commenting Against Kannada Language
Bengaluru: The highly anticipated film ‘Thug Life,’ starring Kamal Haasan, will not be released in Karnataka on its originally scheduled date of June 5. This announcement was made by the film’s producers during a hearing at the Karnataka High Court on Tuesday.
During the proceedings before Justice Nagaprasanna, the petitioner’s counsel asserted that there was no malice involved in the situation and that an apology was unnecessary. They indicated that the screening of the film would be postponed in Karnataka until the matter could be resolved through dialogue.
The court has scheduled a further hearing for June 10 regarding the petition filed by Raaj Kamal Films International, which seeks adequate security for the film’s release in the state.
The hearing also saw the court express strong criticism of Kamal Haasan’s recent comments suggesting that “Kannada was born out of Tamil.” Justice Nagaprasanna remarked that a simple apology could have defused the situation. The petition was prompted by widespread protests against Haasan’s remarks about the Kannada language, along with calls for his apology.
In response to the petition, Justice Nagaprasanna questioned, “Are you a historian or a linguist to make such a statement? No language is born out of another. A single apology could have resolved the situation.” He emphasized that no citizen has the right to offend the sentiments of others and noted the absence of an apology, even a symbolic one. The petitioner’s counsel countered that an apology is warranted only in cases of malice, not misunderstandings. Justice Nagaprasanna acknowledged that Haasan’s comments had stirred significant unrest in Karnataka and undermined the sentiments of the Kannada-speaking population.
“The court observed, ‘There are many ways to clarify a statement, but only one way to seek an apology,’ noting that the letter from Haasan to the Karnataka Film Chamber of Commerce (KFCC) lacked an explicit apology.
The presiding judge emphasized, ‘Freedom of expression cannot extend to the point of hurting the sentiments of individuals, particularly those of a community.’ He further remarked that while the nation is home to many languages, it remains one unified entity, and divisions should not arise from linguistic differences. These comments were reportedly triggered by remarks made by Haasan during a promotional event in Chennai for his upcoming Tamil film, ‘Thug Life.’ The backlash in Karnataka was swift, leading the KFCC to declare that the film would not be screened in the state unless Haasan issued an apology.
In response, Raajkamal Films International, Haasan’s production company, filed a petition with the High Court seeking protection for the film’s release.
The senior counsel representing Haasan stated that, for the time being, the petitioner is not inclined to screen the movie in Karnataka unless a dialogue or trialogue with the KFCC is facilitated. The counsel requested that the matter be adjourned to allow for such discussions.
Senior Advocate Dhyan Chinnappa, representing Haasan, read aloud the letter the actor sent to the KFCC. In it, Haasan expressed that his recent comments regarding the evolution of the Kannada language had been misunderstood and taken out of context. He reaffirmed his genuine love for the Kannada language.”
“He has a genuine love for Kannada and meant no offense,” Chinnappa stated, noting that the communication was issued immediately after Haasan returned from a promotional event in Dubai. The judge remarked, “However, the word ‘apology’ is absent from the communication…” He continued, “Considering all these factors, and in light of the senior counsel’s statement that the screening of the movie would not be insisted upon in the state of Karnataka until the issue is resolved through dialogue, it is clear that an apology— even a symbolic one— is lacking.” Justice Nagaprasanna emphasized that the addition of a simple sentence expressing regret was not a matter of compulsion, but rather a gesture of grace that Haasan should have extended.
Chinnappa defended the statement, asserting that it was not issued with malice and therefore did not necessitate an apology. “This is not a matter of ego,” he argued. “An apology is warranted only when there is malice, not in cases of misunderstanding.” The judge countered, stating that the actor’s remarks had indeed hurt the sentiments of the people of Karnataka and questioned Haasan’s reluctance to apologize. “Language is a vital aspect of emotional and cultural identity,” the court observed, stressing that no individual has the right to make comments that diminish the pride of an entire linguistic community. “Water, land, and language—‘Jala, Nela, Bashe’—are essential to citizens. The very division of this country was based on linguistic lines,” the court concluded.
The late leader C. Rajagopalachari made a similar statement in the past but later issued an apology, as noted by the court. The judge remarked, “If Rajagopalachari could publicly apologize 75 years ago, why can’t you, Kamal Haasan? You have approached this court seeking police protection for a situation of your own making, driven by commercial interests.”
Advocate Chinnappa argued before the court that the remark in question was not “drastically wrong.” During the discussion, when Chinnappa emphasized that both eggs and words must be handled with care, the judge interjected, “You cannot unscramble a scrambled egg.”
About the Author
