The Karnataka High Court on 3 June 2025 strongly criticised actor Kamal Haasan for a remark made during the audio launch of his upcoming film Thug Life, suggesting that the Kannada language is derived from Tamil. The court orally advised the actor to issue a public apology, noting that sentiments of the people of Karnataka had been hurt.
Justice M. Nagaprasanna, presiding over the matter, watched a video clip from the event and expressed concern about the nature and implications of the actor’s statement.
“He has said that Kannada language is born out of Tamil language,” the judge observed during proceedings.
The bench was hearing a plea filed by Raajkamal Films International, seeking protection and directions against potential disruptions to the film’s release in Karnataka. Appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Senior Advocate Dhyan Chinnappa argued that the statement was made in a different context and that the remarks had been misinterpreted.
“Please see the context in which the statement was made,” Chinnappa submitted, adding, “Superstar of the Kannada film industry was also present during that event. The statement made cannot be taken outside and say that he is saying something against Kannada language.” He also submitted a written clarification by Kamal Haasan in response to the controversy.
However, the court found the response lacking. “There is no apology in it. You may be Kamal Haasan or anybody, you cannot hurt the sentiments of the masses,” Justice Nagaprasanna remarked. “The division of this country is on linguistic lines. A public figure cannot make such statements. What has happened because of it is unrest, disharmony. People of Karnataka only asked for an apology. Now you come here seeking protection.”
The judge further questioned Haasan’s qualifications to make such assertions. “On what basis have you made the statement, are you a historian, linguist? On what basis did you speak?”
Drawing a historical parallel, the court referred to a similar situation from 75 years ago. “After 75 years, a similar statement was made and then Shri Rajgopal had apologised. Now you are seeking protection for the release of your film. An apology would have done.”
Raajkamal Films’ plea also noted the significance of Thug Life, calling it a “work-of-art painstakingly crafted over several years” and the second collaboration between Kamal Haasan and director Mani Ratnam since Nayagan (1987).
However, the court responded, “You know the importance of the film saying it is made by Mani Ratnam, but you cannot make a statement (Apology).” It added, “For your own creation you want police machinery to support now. Language is a sentiment attached to the people. You are not an ordinary man, you are a public figure. People writing on social media are also being investigated.”
Further emphasising the responsibility of public figures, the court said, “Now you want the film to be run in Karnataka, leave it. Fundamental right of speech and expression cannot be stretched to hurt sentiments of masses.” It added, “You apologise, you want to earn from here.”
The judge urged the actor’s legal team to consider the broader impact of the remarks, stating, “Discretion is the best part of valour, we will not permit anybody’s sentiments to be taken for a ride. Mistakes happen, you must know what to do when mistakes happen.”
In response to the petitioner’s claim that the film’s viewers’ rights were being infringed, the court remarked, “Let them come before the court, that I want to watch Thug Life.” Justice Nagaprasanna further commented, “Due to slip of tongue anything can happen. Spoken words cannot be taken back but it can be apologised. You cannot unscramble a scrambled egg.”
Following a break, the court reassembled at 2.30 PM the same day and adjourned the hearing on the plea seeking police protection for Kamal Haasan’s film Thug Life to June 10 at 3:30 PM. The court noted that Kamal Haasan’s letter to the Karnataka Film Chamber of Commerce (KFCC) expressing love for Kannada lacked an explicit apology, which KFCC had demanded. The court said, “The lead senior counsel would add that KFCC had demanded apology, the letter that is quoted is in response to the demand in response to apology but the word apology is not found in it. On all these factors that and on statement of counsel that screening would not be made in Karnataka till dialogue happens.”
HC: The ld sr counsel would add that KFCC had demanded apology, the letter that is quoted is in response to the demand in response to apology but the word apology is not found in it. On all these factors that and on statement of counsel that screening would not be made in…
— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) June 3, 2025
However, Haasan’s counsel stated the actor is not currently seeking to release the film in Karnataka and wishes to engage in dialogue with the Film Chamber. The court emphasized that discretion is “the best part of valour” and encouraged resolution through dialogue before proceeding further.
(With inputs from Live Law)
Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.
