A public interest litigation has been lodged in the Punjab and Haryana High Court seeking the reinstatement of Diljit Dosanjh’s biopic ‘Satluj’, removed from an OTT platform without judicial order. The petition argues that the removal infringes on freedom of expression and the right to information.
On July 9, 2026, a public interest litigation (PIL) was filed in the Punjab‑Haryana High Court demanding the restoration of the Diljit Dosanjh‑starrer film Satluj. The movie, which was taken down from the ZEE5 OTT platform just days after its digital release, dramatizes the documented historical events surrounding human‑rights activist Jaswant Singh Khalra during Punjab’s insurgency era.
Historical Context and Significance
Jaswant Singh Khalra, a revered activist, painstakingly compiled evidence of enforced disappearances between 1990 and 1995, helping families of missing Sikh youths seek justice. His investigative work led to his abduction and extrajudicial killing in 1995, a case that remains a sensitive chapter in India’s judicial history. ‘Satluj’ attempts to bring this painful past to the screen, ensuring that younger generations confront the truth rather than historical amnesia.
Legal and Constitutional Dimensions
The petitioner, Sharwan Singh, names the Central Government, the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), the Punjab Government, Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited, and ZEE5 as respondents. The filing contends that the film’s removal, absent any statutory or court order, violates Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of speech and the right to receive information. Moreover, it deprives paying subscribers of content they lawfully purchased.
Political Reactions and Societal Impact
The Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) has announced plans to screen ‘Satluj’ across Punjab. Party chief Sukhbir Singh Badal stated that the initiative aims to educate today’s youth about the “unspeakable tragedy” inflicted by the then‑Congress government on Khalra and thousands of innocent Sikh youths through fake encounters. This move challenges the removal decision while fostering communal awareness.
Implications for the Future
If the High Court upholds the PIL, it could set a precedent for protecting constitutional freedoms in the Indian film industry. It may also compel OTT platforms to adhere strictly to judicial directives before withdrawing content, ushering in greater transparency. The outcome will reverberate beyond cinema, influencing broader debates on human‑rights advocacy and artistic expression in India.
