How does a film like ‘Satluj’, revisiting a dark period in Punjab, pose a threat to national security?

Reports of its public screenings in villages across Punjab and even Rajasthan underline a well-known lesson: Censorship rarely buries a story; it only amplifies it.

2 min readJul 9, 2026 06:50 AM IST

First published on: Jul 9, 2026 at 06:50 AM IST

The story lasted 48 hours on an OTT platform. The debate it has triggered will last longer. Satluj, the biopic on Punjab human rights activist Jaswant Singh Khalra, quietly appeared on ZEE5 last weekend and disappeared abruptly. Earlier titled Punjab 95, it had waged a long battle with the CBFC, facing 127 suggested cuts that its makers refused to accept. Late on Sunday, it was taken down by the platform, citing “current developments”. Reportedly, the ruling establishment fears the film could affect “national security”, that it could be weaponised by “anti-India forces”. Such concerns, framed loosely and applied selectively, have become catch-all justifications for a state that seeks to shrink spaces for free speech.

The film recounts the life and death of Jaswant Singh Khalra, who was abducted from his home on September 6, 1995. He never returned. Eyewitness testimony ultimately led to the conviction of several policemen for his kidnapping and killing. Khalra had painstakingly documented the illegal cremation of thousands of bodies in and around Amritsar. He sought answers for families whose relatives had vanished, he demanded death certificates that would allow them the closure they had long been denied. In Punjab, allegations of disappearances and extra-judicial killings in that period of darkness are part of the public record, many have pursued truth and accountability. Courts have examined many of these cases. Even today, the CBI court in Mohali continues to convict police officials in cases relating to fake encounters. Punjab’s years of militancy remain among the most grim chapters in independent India’s history. The security forces fought an extraordinarily difficult battle, under extremely difficult circumstances — at times crossing the limits of law.

Three decades later, the question is: How does a film revisiting these events pose a threat to national security? Democracies derive their strength not by erasing ugly truths but by examining them fully and honestly. Ironically, had Satluj remained available on an OTT platform, it might have reached only a modest audience. By conspicuously withdrawing it now, authorities have ignited greater curiosity. Reports of its public screenings in villages across Punjab and even Rajasthan underline a well-known lesson: Censorship rarely buries a story; it only amplifies it.