New Delhi: Jaswant Singh Khalra was a 42-year-old bank official turned activist—and general secretary of the Akali Dal’s human rights wing, according to Amnesty International—when he disappeared in 1995.
At the time, he was probing the suspected murder and surreptitious cremations, allegedly of 25,000 civilians, by the Punjab Police. Khalra’s body was never found, but six policemen were convicted for his abduction and murder by a lower court in 2005. The Punjab and Haryana High Court upheld five convictions and enhanced all the sentences to life imprisonment, acquitting a sixth policeman. In 2011, the Supreme Court upheld all five life sentences.
Director Honey Trehan’s Punjab ’95 is a Hindi film about Khalra’s activism and death, starring Punjabi pop icon Diljit Dosanjh as the lead. It is produced by Ronnie Screwvala’s RSVP Movies along with MacGuffin Pictures, which is co-owned by Trehan and Abhishek Chaubey.
In end-2022, Punjab ’95 was submitted to India’s Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), popularly called the Censor Board. A CBFC certificate is compulsory for a film’s release in Indian theatres.
The CBFC is a statutory body under the Information and Broadcasting Ministry. It is governed by The Cinematograph Act, 1952, The Cinematograph (Certification) Rules, 2024, and guidelines issued by the union government.
In this interview—a follow-up to a February 2025 Article 14 investigation into film censorship in the Modi era—Trehan explained that Punjab ’95 had been viewed multiple times by the Board’s committees, with new changes being demanded each time. The total now stands at over 120 changes and cuts that alter the film completely at a fundamental level. These include replacing Punjab with "some fictitious world", as he puts it, and dropping Khalra's name.
A list of the changes ordered by the CBFC in Punjab ’95 featured in the February investigation.
The film attracted global attention when it was selected for the Toronto International Film Festival 2023 then withdrawn by the producers without a public explanation.
With the domestic release stalled by the CBFC, Dosanjh announced in January 2025 that Punjab ’95 would be released outside India this February. This came after a widely publicised meeting he had for undisclosed reasons with Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Shortly thereafter, the international release was cancelled, again without explanation.
In this interview, Trehan offered a detailed account of what has transpired behind the scenes between him, Dosanjh, RSVP Movies and the CBFC in the last 30 months. He said he decided to break his over-two-year-long silence in the press because “I can’t humiliate myself more”.
Excerpts:
Could you take us through your experience with Punjab ’95 and the CBFC?
Punjab ’95 was initially called Ghallughara. We submitted it to the CBFC in mid-December 2022. The first Examining Committee of CBFC stopped the screening midway, saying it’s a Punjabi film and not a Hindi film.
That’s not true.
And it’s against the law for them to comment without watching the entire film. We told them that, but they insisted that we re-apply for certification. The next Examining Committee referred the film to a Revising Committee. When the Revising Committee watched it, many of them expressed appreciation, but they said they would not allow certain things. Later, a demand for 21 cuts was conveyed to us.
What were they?
Actually, it’s 21 points that amount to much more than 21 cuts. Among other things, they wanted the title Ghallughara dropped and Jaswant Singh Khalra’s name changed.
When we submitted the film for CBFC certification, we had simultaneously entered it for the Toronto International Film Festival. Since a premiere at Toronto is prestigious, we planned to release it in Indian theatres two weeks after Toronto. But by the time we were selected for Toronto, which was scheduled for September 2023, we had gone to court (the Bombay High Court) against the Censor Board’s unreasonable, illogical demands. They took advantage of the matter being in court, and pressured the producer (Ronnie Screwvala) to withdraw the film from Toronto.
“They”?
Government officials or CBFC officials. I don’t know how it was done, whether the producer got a call or how, but he was forced to withdraw the film from Toronto.
Legally you don’t require a CBFC certificate to release a film internationally in theatres or festivals.
Absolutely not.
So when Ronnie agreed to pull the film out of Toronto, it was with the hope that if he did as he was asked, it might be cleared by CBFC in India?
Yes, because nobody wants to be in the bad books of the government and high-ranking people.
By then hadn’t you already changed the name from Ghallughara to Punjab ’95?
Yes. But after we made the initial 21 changes demanded by the Revising Committee, they had watched it again and asked for 45 cuts. One of their demands was that even the name Punjab ’95 should be changed.
What happened after Punjab ’95 was withdrawn from Toronto?
The court proceedings continued. At one point, CBFC’s lawyer and the judge both said in court that they’d watched the film and found it so disturbing that they couldn’t sleep.
During the arguments, everything coming from CBFC was based on assumptions. The lordship even pointed this out to the learned lawyer.
The CBFC committed a blunder in the affidavit they submitted in court – they wrote that not only CBFC, even the I&B ministry has a problem with the film. So the lordship asked who showed the film to the ministry, and why.
CBFC comes under the I&B ministry…
But CBFC is an independent body, the point being that its decisions should not be colour-coated by the government’s opinion.
Their lawyer offered to withdraw that point in the affidavit. He said it was included by mistake. The judge said, ‘Are you bargaining in a grocery shop? It’s an affidavit. Either I’ll take all the points or I’ll remove everything.’ They knew they had f***ed up badly, because by committing in the affidavit that the film has been shown to the ministry, you’re categorically saying the government is involved in the film’s certification, which is unethical.
When the judge asked why we need CBFC if the government or I&B ministry is going to decide how to censor films, CBFC’s lawyer started making ridiculous arguments about how releasing the film in Punjab may spark violence. The judge reminded them that law and order is the state government’s job. He said, ‘The CBFC’s job is to give a film certificate unbiased.’
The conversation went on till 4.30 and the judge said he would come to a conclusion soon. He said, ‘This film talks about our past. There’s no point in running away from the past. Unless you counter your past, you’ll never have a greater future. In the light of everything, I’d say I personally feel it should be released without a single cut.’
After everything the judge said, I was happy.
You’re saying the mood in the courtroom made you optimistic—have I understood you correctly?
Yes. I was hopeful that justice would prevail. There was one more day’s hearing left, but it was almost clear. However, by 6.30 Ronnie gets a call to withdraw the case from court.
From there things went on and on. I believe Ronnie was called to Delhi to meet somebody. I’ve no idea who, but when he called me, he was disturbed and upset and said we don’t have an option. He was advised to do an out-of-court settlement. Then their lawyer told us that if we make the cuts given by CBFC, we will get the certificate.
Was the person who spoke to Ronnie from the I&B ministry? A politician or bureaucrat?
Ronnie never disclosed these details to me.
At this point, you’re still at the stage of being asked to make 45 changes. Correct?
Yes. So I made those changes and the Revising Committee rewatched the film.
Another Revising Committee?
No, the same Revising Committee that asked for 21 cuts. If I’m right, the same committee is not allowed to watch a film more than once. This Revising Committee watched my film seven times.
[Note: As per Rule 25, sub-rule (13) of the Cinematograph (Certification) Rules, 2024, if the CBFC chairperson disagrees with a Revising Committee’s decision, there are two options: “the Board shall itself examine the film” or get it re-examined “by another Revising Committee” – not the same committee – and “the decision of the Board or the second Revising Committee, as the case may be, shall be final”.]
Were you present at the screening held after you made 45 cuts?
Yes. They asked us to reduce the number of extra-judicial killings from 25,000. I pointed out that there are YouTube videos of Khalra saab talking about fighting for 25,000 people, and I reminded them that the film is based on his life, but they said no one watches those videos. So I asked them what number they wanted: 20,000? 15,000? 12,000? 10,000? 5,000? They said, ‘If you make it 4,000 or 5,000 it will be good.’ I told the Revising Committee head, ‘Sir, you’re saying that 25,000 extra-judicial killings is not right, but 4,000 is justified.’ And he said, ‘I know your film is on the truth, but who speaks the truth so loudly?’ Those were his exact words, “Itni zor se sach kaun bolta hai?” Maine kaha, “Sir, main bolta hoon.” (I said, ‘Sir, I do.’)
That was not arrogance. When they asked for supporting documents for everything shown in the film, I gave them a 3,800-page file. They said it was too much, so we made another file with the script and supporting documents to counter their 45 objections scene by scene. There was pin-drop silence for a while after that meeting. We struggled to get a response, Ronnie had to make calls. Finally, we were awarded 20 more cuts. So the cuts now reach 65.
Had RSVP by now informed the court that they were withdrawing the case?
We had not withdrawn the case yet. We thought once we arrived at an out-of-court settlement, we would inform the court.
MacGuffin is a creative producer, but Ronnie’s money was riding on the film, and I don’t want my producers to lose money, so even when it got to 65 cuts, we made the additional cuts. The committee watched the film again, and once again there was no response for months. We were told, the RO (regional officer) has changed, the CEO has changed. Within this two-year period I’ve seen around 3-4 CEOs and 3-4 ROs being changed. A new RO or CEO comes, everything starts anew. But the same Revising Committee is watching a number of times. When it got to 85 cuts, my producers and I felt they’re taking us for a ride.
Finally, the CBFC chairperson (Prasoon Joshi) watched the film, and once again there was pin-drop silence for days. Ronnie was making calls, because we really want to know. We’re not criminals, we’re filmmakers. They have to tell us what the problem is. Then, at a meeting with a new CEO, we learned there are more cuts. Now the total is 120-plus cuts. The film is 120 minutes long. If we make 120 cuts, what will be left? At the meeting, the CEO assured me that he was going to watch the film. When I urged him to watch the original and only then the cut version, he said he will not watch the original, because ‘what if I like it?’
An earlier CEO had called it a wonderful film. He told me and a senior RSVP person, ‘Bureaucrats are here to take all the insults from filmmakers, but our hands are tied. Even I want that when my kids grow up, they should watch the original film, if you’re able to save it.’
So I don’t have a problem with any CBFC person or committees. But there are elements who are guided by the government. The government’s involvement is too much.
There’s no organisation left that can work as per the law. When a producer is called not to fight in court, in my eyes it’s a violation of Article 19 of the Constitution relating to free speech. Freedom of expression is merely an illusion in India today.
Shall we get back to the CEO who didn’t want to watch the uncut Punjab ’95?
He said the title has to be changed again, since Punjab ’95 has become famous because of Toronto. I was willing to consider that, but what they said next blew my mind: they wanted Khalra saab’s name and Punjab to be removed from the film. It has to be set in some fictitious world. This would mean removing Punjab from every mention of the Punjab Police – we can only say ‘police’. All the signboards have to be changed so that the word is not spoken or seen in the film. All the characters are Sikhs, policemen are wearing turbans. Can they be from Manipur or Gujarat?
Jaswant Singh Khalra’s name is non-negotiable for me—although I had changed it at an earlier stage despite feeling bad and despite it being an insult because I thought once the film goes through, I’ll speak to the higher authorities about it. It didn’t go through at that stage, and now looking back, I’m happy it didn’t.
At this stage, when the cuts had crossed 120, we were also asked to remove the Indian flag from the film. The flag appears in a shot of the Supreme Court, because the court has the Indian flag in reality. He said, ‘This is the reality, but remove it from the film. We don’t want the Indian flag in a film on Punjab.’ I asked: ‘Don’t you consider Punjab a part of India?’
What does it mean when you say the Indian flag should be removed from a film about Punjab? Who is talking about Khalistan—the artist or politicians?
What justification was offered?
None. He said, ‘It’s a sensitive thing.’ He also asked me to remove the gurbani from the film.
Kyun (why)?
This new CEO said the gurbani “provokes emotions”—those were his words. Among other changes, they wanted me to remove a double murder sequence. Going by the number of cuts they demanded, I asked, ‘Do you want me to release only the trailer?’ At that point, I told the CBFC people at the meeting that I’m not going to make a single additional cut, and I’m undoing every cut they asked us to make until then. ‘Now my film will stay as I chose to make it. I will show it to whoever I want. I don’t care if you give me the certificate or not.’ They said I will not get the certificate. I walked out.
The higher authorities of CBFC even wrote to my producer asking him to write off the film.
Is your court case still on?
They had used that trump card and said we can’t have the Toronto premiere since it’s a matter in court. So this year, when we decided to release Punjab ’95 internationally, we finally withdrew the case from court because that’s what the government had also told us to do. I didn’t want to give them room to point out that my film is in court.
What went on behind the scenes to stop the international release?
We got an international studio on board, and Diljit announced 7 February 2025 as the international release date. But by January-end, after the trailer was released, Ronnie was told by, who I don’t know, some big guy in the bureaucracy or politics, ki this will be seen as not in good taste.
This is goondagardi (hooliganism). I don’t need the Indian CBFC certificate to release my film internationally. But they put so much pressure that Ronnie had to cancel the contract. He’s been requested to wait for some time.
After that, me and Ronnie were called to the I&B ministry in Delhi this February. We went there and requested them to look into the matter, because every time Ronnie gets a call he stops the film’s release. He’s an obedient person who has listened. We don’t want to make enemies. We were promised that they’ll look into the matter after the Delhi election. But the election is done, the Delhi government has been formed, and we’re yet to hear from the I&B ministry. Legally, they have nothing to do with the CBFC certificate, but we need to hear from them.
Why did you decide you can no longer keep quiet?
Because we’ve done whatever we were threatened or forced to do, but still there’s no solution.
Khalra saab is one of the greatest martyrs of Punjab where I come from. I’m answerable to the community, to Punjab, to his family. For 27 years, the entire Punjab and Bollywood approached them, but they never gave anyone else the rights for a film on Khalra saab’s life. They trusted me. What will they be saying? That it’s been two years, but he’s not talking about his own film. Is he ashamed? Is he too scared? I chose to make a film about a person who, keeping his family aside, fought for justice for 25,000 people. If I can’t stand by that film, I had no right to make it, and I’m insulting this great martyr of Punjab, I’m insulting the community. I cannot die with that burden, so I’m coming out and speaking about it.
You seem emotional about this film and Jaswant Singh Khalra.
A normal bank ka banda working in the loan department chose to work for human rights. The film only talks about human rights – not Khalistan, BJP, Congress or anyone. When I think of the fact that I’ve made a film on this person’s life, I pity myself if I don’t talk about him and stand by my film. In fact, I’m not standing by my film, I’m standing by his martyrdom. I don’t rate him any less than Bhagat Singh. I’m a fan of people who fight for a cause without thinking about themselves or their family. If I’m not standing by a film I have made on such a big martyr, I should be ashamed of myself, which I have been for the past two years. I can’t humiliate myself more.
What is the significance of the word ghallughara?
Ghallughara is a Punjabi word for massacre.
Or genocide?
Yes. In India there were two ghallughara. The first, when Babur came, is called chhota (small) ghallughara in which approximately 5,000 Sikhs were killed. The second, when Ahmad Shah Abdali came, is called vada (big) ghallughara in which almost 15,000 were killed.
We’re talking about Sikh and Punjab history…
Yes, because when anyone came to India, they came via Afghanistan, Punjab, then Delhi or Lahore. Two more episodes are categorised as ghallughara: Jallianwala Bagh and 1984. When you add the number of people killed in all four ghallugharas, the figure is less than the 25,000 Khalra saab was fighting for. So for me, what happened in Punjab from 1984 to 1997 is the biggest ghallughara.
The Congress was in power in the state and at the Centre when Jaswant Singh Khalra was murdered. One would think BJP would be happy with such a film because it makes Congress look bad. Logically, help me understand why a BJP government and BJP-controlled Censor Board are stopping your film?
Logically, I feel the government alone doesn’t take a call. The deep state intelligence, which includes big bureaucrats, also tell the government how to function. The reasons could be many. For instance, in these 10 years, if this government has faced defeat from anybody, it’s been due to the farmers’ protests. They’ve also never come to power in Punjab.
You mean BJP has not independently won in the state. [Note: The Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD)-BJP alliance ran the Punjab government from 2007-2017.]
Yes, yes. And when AAP came to power, BJP had hardly any seats. [Note: BJP presently has 2 seats in the 117-member Punjab Assembly.]
It’s also possible they don’t want a Sikh hero emerging from Punjab. This government has never liked most of Punjab. When you need votes, you wear a turban and go to Punjab’s gurudwaras to do seva. But when the people of Punjab want to come to Delhi for the farmers’ protests, you create borders.
You mean the barriers that were created to prevent Punjab’s farmers from entering Delhi for protests?
Yes. Then they are called Khalistani.
I’ve no idea why the film is being stopped. It’s not propaganda. That could be one problem—that no government benefits from it. The easiest film to make today is a propaganda film. You will not only save money because your film will be mentioned in speeches by big people, you will get free screenings in Parliament, your film is guaranteed to become a national event.
Diljit Dosanjh supported the farmers’ protests. Could that have gone against this film?
I’ve no idea. To clear that image, they called Diljit for a meeting. The video of him meeting the Prime Minister has gone viral. I’m just making assumptions about why they’re not allowing my film to release.
You said they called Diljit to “clear” that.
Not “clear”. No, no. Diljit got a call from government officials that the PM wants to meet him, he went, he was happy with the meeting. See, if a country’s PM calls, you will meet. I don’t know what they said. I’ve not asked Diljit.
For observers, it looked like the producers asked him to go for the meeting in the hope that Modi will get the CBFC to clear the film. This perception was created especially because the international release was announced almost immediately after that meeting.
The PM is too much of a big boss to get into such small matters. Neither Ronnie nor I ever told Diljit to address this matter with him or request anybody. We have faith in the law and court procedures, and we don’t want favours. It’s unethical to ask Diljit to do that. And it’s not good, because understand, if you take a political favour from any party, you have to do a lot in return. (He laughs) And that ruins your image.
Did the Revising Committee at any point state a reason why Punjab ’95 is being blocked?
Yes, the first time the Revising Committee saw it, they told us we cannot show the Punjab Police in a bad light or speak too much about Punjab because the India-Canada thing was going on at that time.
Did they actually specify that ongoing India-Canada tensions were one of their concerns?
Yes. When I told the Revising Committee it’s a fact that Canada invited Khalra saab, and Canada wrote a letter to the Indian government for his security, they said, ‘Canada is nobody to tell the Indian Government what to do.’ I told them this actually happened, and not in the current time but in the 1990s. They said, ‘But we don’t want to put this out.’
I believe you’ve been barred from attending further Revising Committee meetings.
After I walked out that day, there were Revising Committee meetings I didn’t attend because RSVP was in touch with CBFC through the lawyer and they said your director need not come.
What is Ronnie’s and RSVP’s position on Punjab ’95 now?
Ronnie is trying hard to get the film out, even with 120 cuts. His money is stuck, so I understand. And because Punjab elections are in 2027, the government does not want it being said that they didn’t allow a film on Khalra saab to be released, so they want the film to come out with 120 cuts.
What’s your stand on that?
I told Ronnie that I’ll give them the film with 120 cuts—it’s called Satluj, not even Punjab ’95—but I said, that film is basically directed by the government of India and edited by the CBFC, so it will not carry my name as a director and producer, Diljit’s name will not be on it, neither will we promote the film. I’ve tweeted about that.
Has Diljit given you this guarantee?
Yes.
What is Ronnie’s and RSVP’s plan?
There must be a lot at stake because Ronnie has so many other businesses. He’s a big person, and he wants to fight it out in his own way. He’s waiting. We’ve been waiting since the Delhi election got over in February.
Please understand, though I’m taking this stand, Ronnie is not a villain for me. I know he’s not fighting in court, but I understand. If he fights further, his everything can get ruined. For one film, nobody wants his empire to fall. Remember that though he has reservations, though he’s been threatened, he has stood by the film and filmmaker throughout. The arm-twisting of such a kind, generous producer is not healthy for the film business.
What is your mental state now?
I’m not low, but you get disappointed with the system. When things are not justified, you lose respect for people in power in respectable posts. You feel cheated.
At times, it pains me, I get bitter. But to keep calm, I meditate, I try to read, I try to stay positive, I write. Ronnie has been a great support. He could have said, ‘My money is stuck because of your film’, but he said, ‘Let’s move out of this and make another film.’ So I’m now finishing Raat Akeli Hai 2, a Netflix Original produced by RSVP with MacGuffin, but with the hope that justice will prevail someday and that the higher authorities who told the producer to write off Punjab ’95 ‘because XYZ of that ministry is not in favour of it’ will understand. I doubt if those ministers have seen the film.
You’ve mentioned “higher authorities” in CBFC. You’ve not taken the chairperson’s name. Prasoon has worked with Ronnie as a film writer and lyricist. Don’t they get along anymore? If they’re friends, how didn’t that relationship help your film?
Definitely I could see that probably he’s not in favour of the film, though Ronnie hasn’t spoken to me about it. Because at a meeting in the ministry where I was present, Ronnie was asked if the higher authority person has a personal issue with him because he always makes the point that this film should not come out.
With the benefit of hindsight, do you feel it was a mistake to submit the film for CBFC clearance before its Toronto premiere?
Yes.
Because now even the world has not seen it.
But it cannot happen that the world doesn’t see Punjab ’95. Khalra saab was abducted in 1995. He got justice two decades later when the Supreme Court upheld the life sentences of the policemen who abducted and killed him. If history is repeating itself in that sense, now again the government has abducted Khalra saab, so I think again, he’ll get justice someday. I’ve no idea how, but the world will watch my film.
It takes courage to say whatever you have told me in this interview. Aren’t you afraid?
Afraid of what? I’ve not committed a crime, I made a film. I’m ready to fight everything in court. Don’t stop me or my producers from fighting in court.
Have you received threats personally?
I don’t want to name him, but when I told one of CBFC’s big lawyers that the cuts are not legitimate, he said, ‘Just do it, no? Do you really want to take this film on your head?’
Was it said in a threatening way?
In a polite way. Whatever happens to me is still secondary, but I’m happy and content that I made the film the way I wanted to make it.
At one point, the SGPC (Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee) and Akal Takht asked to watch the film. I felt that since I’m so attached to it, there could be things I’m overlooking—they probably know more than me about Punjab’s regional, religious and sentimental values, the politics and people of Punjab, because they’re buzurg (elderly) and respectable people attached with political scenarios, so when they reached out, I told myself not to get scared, but to show it to them. Because if there is genuinely a problem with the film, they can tell me so and that I need to remove certain things. I felt if they point out problems, then I can see that this is probably what CBFC is asking for or what the I&B Ministry is pushing the CBFC to ask us, which they’re not saying directly. So I can rectify that.
I screened the film for SGPC and Akal Takht Sahib, and they loved it. There’s a video on YouTube of SGPC’s general secretary saying he salutes the filmmakers because we’ve walked a thin line and instead of talking about politics, the film fights for human rights. That gave me more courage.
If SGPC or Akal Takht had objections, would you have cut the film to assuage their concerns?
Not their concerns, their legitimate concerns which have a legal basis, such as the possibility of hurting someone’s emotions. They said it’s not hurting.
What would you say to those who note that you are opposing the CBFC but heeding a religious body? India is filled with people citing “hurt sentiments”, including clergy and religious fundamentalists who attack films...
(Cuts in) SGPC also has political influence. It has political people, including from Akali Dal and other parties. It’s a community, it’s a dharm, and my thing is, you cannot hurt religious sentiments, because that can cause a big fire. So I had all the more reason to show the film to Akal Takht and SGPC, to be sure I’m not hurting religious sentiments. If this film is problematic for Punjab, they would have raised at least a couple of objections.
Are you saying if Akal Takht or SGPC had objections, you would have cut the film?
I’m not saying that. I’m saying if they pointed out issues, probably that could have helped me understand CBFC’s viewpoint. But they had no objection to the film. So I still don’t know what the CBFC’s problem is with Punjab ’95.
Anurag Kashyap told me that even CBFC committee members now second guess the government, the mob and the right wing. He called it a “fear of the invisible” because no one knows who will object.
I second Anurag’s statement. An invisible face is not letting films come out. We don’t have one face. The Censor Board is merely a back-door entry for the government to control the film world because they’ve understood the power of cinema. Films have a large audience and that’s their way to reach the audience. They’re using films and filmmakers as mouthpieces, to wash off sins they’ve committed. They don’t like anything progressive.
The young Kannada filmmaker, Natesh Hegde, told me there is now a Censor Board in the back of filmmakers’ minds, driven by fear of the CBFC.
I agree.
How will that affect creativity?
It will cause great harm. If we do not unite, a day is not far when there will be a law that before making a film you must get your script approved by government officials. This is not a single person’s battle. If a single person fights, he’ll get killed or have to stop working. Creatively, mentally and physically, it will be the death of that creative mind. We must fight this together.
(Anna M M Vetticad specialises in the intersection of cinema with feminist and other socio-political concerns. She is the author of The Adventures of an Intrepid Film Critic.)
Get exclusive access to new databases, expert analyses, weekly newsletters, book excerpts and new ideas on democracy, law and society in India. Subscribe to Article 14.