For more than a year, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his government have appeared to be confronting an increasingly difficult strategic and diplomatic environment. The more New Delhi has attempted to shape international opinion through media campaigns and diplomatic outreach directed against Pakistan, the more it has found itself facing criticism, controversy and unforeseen setbacks, both domestically and internationally.
At present, a storm of debate is unfolding across Indian and international political, humanitarian and media circles over actor, singer and producer Diljit Dosanjh’s latest film, Satluj. Television anchors, film critics, political commentators, YouTubers, social media influencers and civil society activists have all entered the discussion. While many viewers have praised the film as a courageous portrayal of one of the darkest chapters of India’s recent history, others have condemned it as politically motivated or socially divisive.
Whatever one’s position may be, one fact is undeniable: the controversy has transformed Satluj from a motion picture into an international conversation on history, censorship, human rights and freedom of expression. It is equally important to note that this remarkable cinematic work, based on a documented and extensively debated chapter of India’s political, judicial and constitutional history, stands in sharp contrast to the recently released Dhurandhar. Whereas Satluj derives its narrative from documented events and historical records, Dhurandhar has been criticised in many quarters for relying on fictionalised episodes, exaggerated heroism and pathetic characterisation in pursuit of a politically convenient narrative.
The contrast becomes even more striking when viewed against the backdrop of recent India-Pakistan tensions. Following last year’s brief military confrontation, which resulted in India’s loss of several advanced combat aircraft and considerable strategic embarrassment, New Delhi faced mounting domestic pressure to restore public confidence and reinforce the morale of its armed forces. Within this context, many critics viewed Dhurandhar as an awkward attempt to project India’s security establishment in a heroic light while portraying Pakistan as the principal antagonist. They argued that the film relied heavily on cinematic spectacle, exaggerated action sequences and emotionally charged nationalism rather than historical balance or factual authenticity. While some voices in Pakistan called for a similarly themed cinematic response, events unfolded rather differently.
Ironically, what many expected Pakistan’s film industry to produce instead emerged from within India itself. Rather than presenting another patriotic fantasy, Indian filmmakers introduced Satluj, a film inspired by the life and work of human rights activist Jaswant Singh Khalra. Khalra devoted years to documenting allegations of enforced disappearances and unlawful cremations during Punjab’s insurgency period before he himself was abducted and murdered in 1995.
The Punjab insurgency of the 1980s and early 1990s remains among the most sensitive and contested periods in India’s modern history. Thousands of civilians, militants and security personnel lost their lives during those turbulent years. Khalra examined cremation-ground registers, police documents, municipal records, mortuary records and testimonies from families of missing persons. Based on his investigation, he alleged that approximately 25,000 individuals had been illegally killed, disappeared and secretly cremated by security forces. While this figure has remained disputed and has not been judicially established in its entirety, the existence of unlawful cremations and serious procedural irregularities was subsequently examined by the courts and the National Human Rights Commission.
The film portrays allegations that suspected militants and civilians were killed outside the judicial process before being cremated as “unclaimed” bodies. These allegations prompted lengthy legal proceedings and official investigations, making the issue one of the most extensively discussed human rights controversies in modern Indian history. In 2005, several Punjab police officers were convicted for the abduction and murder of Jaswant Singh Khalra, thereby judicially confirming that he had indeed been targeted and killed because of his investigative work as a human activist.
Among the most disturbing allegations associated with that period are claims that some police officers were rewarded with promotions and official recognition based on the number of alleged militants they claimed to have eliminated. If such allegations accurately reflect institutional practices during that era, they represent one of the gravest human rights failures in the history of independent India and raise profound questions regarding democratic accountability and the rule of law.
Viewed from a broader strategic perspective, the emergence of Satluj has acquired significance far beyond cinema. Journalists, political commentators and strategic analysts across the world have pointed to the film as evidence that some of the strongest challenges to official state narratives can originate from within India itself. They argue that whereas films such as Dhurandhar sought to reinforce a particular nationalist narrative by ridiculously glorifying state institutions and projecting Pakistan as the principal adversary, Satluj redirects attention towards India’s own unresolved debates surrounding human rights, civil liberties, minority rights, federal politics and historical accountability.
Consequently, the film has come to symbolise what many observers describe as a fundamental contradiction: the projection of democratic values abroad while simultaneously struggling to accommodate dissenting historical narratives and artistic expression at home.
The journey of Satluj has itself resembled a political drama. Directed by Honey Trehan and produced by Ronnie Screwvala’s RSVP Movies, the film stars Diljit Dosanjh in the lead role alongside Arjun Rampal, Kanwaljeet Singh, Suvinder Vicky and Geetika Vidya Ohlyan. The project endured years of delays owing to certification disputes with India’s Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC). Reports suggested that the filmmakers resisted extensive proposed cuts, resulting in prolonged legal and administrative uncertainty. Originally conceived under the title Ghallughara, it later became Punjab ’95 before finally being released digitally in July 2026 as Satluj, named after the historic river flowing through Punjab.
Ironically, the campaign to suppress the film proved to be its most effective publicity. Millions of people who had never previously heard of the project began searching for it, reading about its background and attempting to watch it. History repeatedly demonstrates that attempts to suppress books, films or ideas often generate greater public curiosity than the works themselves. Satluj appears to have become another illustration of this phenomenon. Shortly after its digital release on ZEE5, the film was withdrawn, triggering renewed political debate and attracting even greater international media attention.
Cinema has always been far more than a medium of entertainment. It preserves collective memory, shapes public consciousness and influences national conversations. Some films celebrate triumphs, others revisit tragedies, while a rare few compel societies to confront uncomfortable chapters of their own history. Whether audiences ultimately agree with the interpretation presented in Satluj or reject it, the film has demonstrated cinema’s enduring ability to stimulate debate long after the closing credits have rolled.
To conclude, irrespective of one’s interpretation of the events portrayed in Satluj, the controversy surrounding the film has undeniably provided the global media and strategic community with fresh grounds to scrutinise New Delhi’s narrative management. It has also reinforced a timeless reality: credible self-criticism often carries greater persuasive power than externally directed propaganda.
