The release of actor Kamal Haasan’s upcoming film Thug Life in Karnataka has been temporarily halted following a controversy over his recent remark linking the Kannada language to Tamil. The Karnataka High Court was informed on June 3 that Haasan would not release the film in the state for now, even though he declined to issue an apology.
The controversy arose after Haasan made a statement during the film’s audio launch, suggesting that the Kannada language was born from Tamil. This comment sparked backlash from the Kannada film community, leading the Karnataka Film Chamber of Commerce (KFCC) to decide against allowing the film's exhibition in the state.
During the court hearing, Kamal Haasan, through his senior counsel, expressed that he meant no harm or disrespect. However, he did not apologise for his statement. Instead, he offered to initiate a discussion with the KFCC. The Court, after hearing submissions from all parties, noted:
The petitioner at present is not for now willing to screen movie in Karnataka unless he would encourage a dialogue with Film Chamber of Commerce. In that light, the learned senior counsel submits that matter be adjourned... The screening would not be made in Karnataka till dialogue happens. In that light the hearing is adjourned to June 10 at 3.30 pm.
Senior Advocate Dhyan Chinnappa, appearing for Haasan, submitted a letter to the KFCC, describing Haasan’s respect and affection for Karnataka and its language. He stressed that there was no malicious intent in the statement and argued:
"I want to make two statements. One is to say I apologise and the other is to explain everything and express love for Karnataka and its language. There was no malice to the language as can be seen."
However, the Court remarked that the letter failed to include a clear apology and stated:
The bench further expressed concern over Haasan’s unwillingness to issue a direct apology and noted:
This is where you are sticking on to the ego not apologizing... It may be Kamal Haasan or anyone... it is the sentiments of the masses of the state that has been undermined... You should understand the magnitude of the problem. It can lead to something else.
Chinnappa replied that the actor’s letter was not a justification, but a declaration of his stance, emphasizing that there was no intent to insult any language.
Informing the court that the film would not be released in Karnataka for now, Chinnappa said:
He (Kamal Haasan) said 'Art can wait and he says release can wait in Karnataka'... We will have a dialogue with KFCC. If they are willing to discuss it, we will discuss. Whatever is written in the letter is sincere.
I will adjourn the matter since they are not seeking police protection now. In between you can have a dialogue, or a tri-logue.
The producers of Thug Life also filed a petition claiming that the KFCC’s actions violated their rights under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to practice any profession or carry on any occupation or trade.
Read Also:-Karnataka High Court Quashes FIR Against Youth for Reselling IPL Tickets
Before the lunch break, Chinnappa argued that Haasan’s remarks were being taken out of context, and were made while inviting a Kannada actor to the event. However, the Court was not convinced. After reviewing the letter submitted by Haasan, the bench said:
“There is no apology in it. You may be Kamal Haasan or anybody, you cannot hurt the sentiments of the masses. 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 Court also questioned Haasan’s authority to make such linguistic claims, observing that he was neither a historian nor a language expert.
Chinnappa tried to highlight the artistic value of Thug Life, pointing out that it marked Haasan’s second collaboration with director Mani Ratnam after their 1987 film Nayakan. The bench acknowledged the cultural significance of the project but maintained that artistic expression must not come at the cost of public sentiment.
