Jailer 2 and the Debate Over Police Encounters
A new Rajinikanth movie Jailer 2 has once again reignited the conversation about the connection between action movies, state violence, and the rule of law. The upcoming film will see Rajinikanth return as Muthuvel Pandian, a character tied to punishing criminals through violence. Violence as depicted in the film has sparked debate about the relationship between state violence and cinema.
Tio en octubre 12, 2026 Do not reflect any other essential legal attack on Jailer 2 primarily based on the glorification of the police. However, the movie adheres to the well-established legal tradition established by Indian movies. In 2024, a plea filed on the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court challenged dialogues from Rajinikanth’s Vettaiyan, claiming the film was glorifying out of courtroom killings. The sensitivity of the subject in the dispute centered on whether depicting police violence in a fictional setting can erode public trust in the system. (Mid-day)
What Does Article 21 Say About the Right to Life?
Article 21 of the Constitution which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty: No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law. The law may be such as to include every individual person, even if he is accused of or has been found guilty of a criminal offence.
Police are allowed to use force as authorized by law, such as when life is in danger. But an encounter killing cannot be automatically deemed legal just because the police define it as self-defence or say the killed person was a dangerous criminal. The incident should be investigated and a legal process followed.
The constitutional principle is that punishment comes after law, not in place of it. The accused still has the legal safeguards to which they are entitled, and normally the courts decide whether they are guilty. The example shows that Article 21 applies even where the offence is heinous or has roused public ire against the accused.
What has the Supreme Court ruled on encounter killings?
In People’s Union for Civil Liberties v. State of Maharashtra, the Supreme Court in 2014 set out guidelines for these probes in respect of deaths during police encounter. The Court stated that the incident must be examined independently and the police version of the event cannot be blindly relied upon on the grounds that the police opened fire in self-defence.
It covers issues like how police should document relevant intelligence, the need to register an FIR if a person has died in an encounter involving use of police firearms, independent investigation and collection and preservation of evidence. These are aimed at ensuring an investigation of allegations of illegal killing and not to let officers off the hook.
In a judgment dated May 2025, the Supreme Court again emphasised these safeguard when hearing issues related to encounter investigations. The Court observed that fake encounters amount to extrajudicial killings and may erode the rule of law and the criminal justice system, irrespective of whether society perceives the killed individual as a criminal. (Supreme Court judgment)
Can Cinema Glorify Encounters with Police?
Movies are fictional and works of art. Movies can show brutal murders, crooked police, vigilantes, and lopsided battles between laws and the popular anger. Showing a crime is not the same as promoting the crime. An actor may shoot a murdered man in a movie to criticize police misconduct, to make a philosophical point, or to demonstrate what happens when we forsake the process of law.
It may prove more complicated when a film is perceived to endorse or effectively endorse extra-judicial killings as the only just, right or perfect form of justice. In the Vettaiyan row, the petitioner contended that some dialogues expressed the notion that encounters with the police were punishment for crimes as well as a deterrent for further crimes. The court issued notices to the authorities and the film industry but not a ban. (Mondaq)
Knowing what shows violence and what shows approval can be a matter of context. The general story of the film, the depiction of characters and their response to the events can influence the meaning of a scene. An imaginary police officer cannot make an act a law, nor can actors’ fictional words give a legal right to kill the accused.
What Role Does the Film Certification Board Play?
‘Central Board of Film Certification’ deals with films for certification under the Cinematograph Act and regulations made thereunder. The Guidelines issued by the CBFC say that the picture must not incite or glorify or justify antisocial acts such as violence. The Guidelines mentions parts that show violence and give rise to the risk of desensitisation or de-humanisation of viewers. But the entire film has to be looked at.
Just because it is shown in the film does not mean that any of these acts could be performed legally in real life. Equally, just because an illegality is depicted in a film does not mean that the film is therefore unlawful. It’s about the context, treatment and certification.
Assuming a film like Jailer 2 had a relevant legal question, it would be determined based on what was actually shown in the film, and not on assumptions that can be made based on the genre or previous films in a franchise. Reports of potential certification changes should be contrasted against the CBFC’s published guidelines, which are the relevant criteria in judging the depiction of violent acts. (CBFC guidelines)
