Madras High Court issues notice asking to remove dialogues glorifying ‘encounter’ from upcoming Vettaiyan film

The bank of Justice R Subramanian And Justice Victoria Gowri ordered notice to the principal secretary to the government, the Censor Board of Film Certification and Lyca Production in a plea filed by Madurai-based Palanivelu.

In his plea, Palanivel pointed out that in the recently released trailer of the film Vettaiyan, Rajnikanth’s character said that “encounter is not only a punishment but also a preventive measure to stop such crimes”. Palanivel pointed out that if such unconstitutional dialogues were allowed to be monitored, the public would soon start demanding encounters in every criminal case instead of putting the perpetrator behind bars through trials. He added that such a situation would result in the accused being defenseless and losing his fundamental right to defense enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution.

Palanivel submitted that the film was not legally eligible for a U/A certificate despite glorifying an unconstitutional extrajudicial killing and justifying it as lawful and constitutional. He therefore argued that the film should only be accessible to adults as a child in his young mind would consider the words of a top hero as sacred. He added that Tamil cinema has always played a big role in changing people’s psyche and there is a possibility that people will start seeking justice through fake encounters because they see it as a way to would see justice more quickly.

Palanivel further submitted that characterizing Rajnikanth’s role as a renowned encounter specialist would encourage ruthless police Raj rather than trust in the judicial system and other constitutional bodies.

Palanivel stated that he approached the court as the Cinematograph Act 1952 does not make any provision for lodging an objection and seeking redress from third parties. He argued that while leisure and entertainment media are divorced from logic and reality, these cannot be a reason to convey an anti-constitutional ethos to the film’s viewers, and if such conveyance is allowed, it is the very basis of the Democratic setup would probably be undermined.

Palanivel also submitted that the CBFC is obliged to restrict a film not only in the case of scenes of obscenity but also in the case of legitimizing and sanctifying extrajudicial killings by police in the name of encounters. Since a statement made by Palanivel to the concerned authorities in this regard was not acted upon, Palanivel approached the court to stay the release of the film and remove/mute the dialogues that promote encounters.

Case Title: Palanivelu v. Chief Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu and Others

Case No: WP(MD) 23631 of 2024