Honey Trehan’s film, previously titled ‘Punjab ’95’, is out on Zee5.
Jul 04, 2026 · 09:42 amShare
Diljit Dosanjh in Satluj (2026) | RSVP/MacGuffin Pictures
Honey Trehan’s Punjab ’95, which was in censorship purgatory for nearly four years, is finally out on the streaming platform Zee5. Punjab ’95 has a new title – Satluj. Call the film by any name, it remains a harrowing, heart-rending chronicle of the consequences of unchecked state power.
The Hindi-Punjabi movie, which is led by Diljit Dosanjh, has been released on Zee5 without the numerous cuts that were demanded by the censor board. Satluj is based on the disappearance of human rights activist Jaswant Singh Khalra in 1995.
Before you scroll further…
Get the best of Scroll directly in your inbox for free.
Khalra was abducted while investigating enforced disappearances and extra-judicial killings by the Punjab police during anti-terrorism operations. After several years, a bunch of junior police officers was convicted for Khalra’s murder. His body was never found.
Satluj opens with a chilling night-time sequence, the first of many. Scenes of police vehicles driving past unlit fields in the still of the night, bearing innocents who will soon be corpses, create an effective metaphor of dark deeds carried out when nobody is looking. Later in the film, shafts of light in darkness signal a different set of travellers who bring hope, rather than misery.
Troubled by the disappearance of a friend and then his protesting mother (Jyoti Dogra), Jaswant (Diljit Dosanjh) begins investigating the mysterious increase in unclaimed bodies at morgues and crematoria. A policemen, Satnam (Saurabh Sachdeva), offers Jaswant some help.
Although Jaswant’s campaign worries his wife Paramjit (Geetika Vidya Ohlyan), she remains supportive even after the family is subjected to scary phone calls and surveillance.
Despite threats masquerading as advice – why does the world need to know about our problem, a politician asks Jaswant – the activist soldiers on. Sugga (Suvinder Vicky) and his odious posse of rogue policemen turn on the screws in the only way they know. One of the film’s most nerve-shredding sequences takes place in Satnam’s house, over a meal of saag.
Advertisement
After Jaswant goes missing, public pressure led by Paramjit forces politicians and the judiciary to intervene. A Central Bureau of Investigation team led by Samudra (Arjun Rampal) turns up in Punjab to understand what happened to Jaswant, and who was responsible.
Honey Trehan and co-writers Niren Bhatt and Utsav Maitra have crafted Satluj as a classic conspiracy thriller. KU Mohanan’s rich camerawork and Sreekar Prasad’s precise editing add layers to a forensic expose of a rot that goes all the way to the top. Despite its length – 163 minutes, and not all of them necessary – Satluj is a gripping, tension-filled affair.
Some of the radicalism of the courageous personality who inspired Satluj is undercut by the film’s insistence on portraying Jaswant as a newcomer to politics as well as a spiritual man. The actual Jaswant Singh Khalra belonged to a family steeped in leftist politics.
In Satluj, Jaswant and other characters are motivated by religious beliefs. The larger civil society movement supporting Jaswant, and which continues his activism, isn’t visible.
Advertisement
Rather than a straightforward biopic of Khalra, Satluj uses its hero to lay bare a horrific culture of impunity. The movie also emphasises the importance of bearing witness. Satluj uncovers – and pays tribute to – a conscience network that ensures justice.
The film is admirably measured in its outrage and powerfully performed across the board. There are few actors like Diljit Dosanjh to play an activist who can raise hell in quiet tones. Like the film itself, Dosanjh selflessly goes about his work without drawing attention to himself.
Dosanjh’s massive impact is complemented by a cast that is one with the film’s overall vision. Several actors among the ensemble make a mark: Geetika Vidya Ohlyan’s strong-willed Paramjit, Vansh Bhardwaj’s promotion-obsessed cop, Saurabh Sachdeva’s sad-eyed whistle-blower, Kanwaljit Singh’s venal Bitta, Arjun Rampal’s principled Central Bureau of Investigation officer, Varun Badola’s committed lawyer. Suvinder Vicky’s demonic Sugga is a Nazi in a Punjab Police uniform who embodies the banality of evil.
Despite some indulgent moments, especially in the latter sections, Honey Trehan deftly showcases an extensive cast and complex themes. Trehan’s understanding of the circumstances that encourage the killing spree, as well as his clarity on human rights and moral probity, make Satluj one of the sharpest political films in recent memory.
There’s no scope for whataboutery in Satluj, no quarter given to claims that the only way to fight terrorism was to let the police off the leash. Although laser-focused on Jaswant’s travails, and exploring a specific period in Punjab’s history, the movie could be about any other part of India governed by unquestioned authority.
Advertisement
In Bitta’s dismissal of activism as a gimmick, or Sugga’s acceptance of collateral damage in order to combat militants, Satluj goes beyond its immediate setting. The new title oddly suits the film: between Punjab ’95 and Satluj lies the story of a country as it was and continues to be.https://www.youtube.com/embed/Cn7ga2e7mZc?modestbranding=1&rel=0&controls=2&showinfo=0&autoplay=0&enablejsapi=1&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fscroll.in&widgetid=1&forigin=https%3A%2F%2Fscroll.in%2Freel%2F1094035%2Fsatluj-review-a-harrowing-heart-rending-tale-of-impunity-and-courage&aoriginsup=1&vf=1Satluj (2026).
Also read:
Why the film ‘Punjab ’95’ hasn’t seen light of day
He fought against the ‘disappearing’ of young men from Punjab. Then one day, he ‘disappeared’ too
British government ‘covered up’ its role in Amritsar massacre in India
This article is more than 8 years old
A Sikh group is demanding an inquiry into the SAS’s involvement in the storming of the Golden Temple in 1984
Jamie DowardSat 28 Oct 2017 19.02 EDTShare
The government has been accused of covering up the full extent of the UK’s support for India’s bloody crackdown on Sikhs in 1984.
A new report calls for a full inquiry into the role played by Margaret Thatcher’s government in the events leading up to a massacre in which hundreds, possibly thousands, of Sikhs and Indian soldiers died.
In 2014 David Cameron ordered a review after the accidental release of secret documents revealed that a British SAS officer had been drafted in to advise the Indian authorities on removing armed Sikh militants from the Golden Temple at Amritsar, Sikhism’s holiest shrine.
The documents said the plan, known as Operation Blue Star, was carried out with the full knowledge of the Thatcher government.
A report, Sacrificing Sikhs, published by the Sikh Federation UK, described Cameron’s review, conducted by Sir Jeremy Heywood, as a “whitewash”.
It claims that attempts to expose the full facts have been thwarted by government secrecy rules and conflicts of interest. More than half of the Foreign Office’s files on India from 1984 have been censored in whole or in part.
Some documents suggest the Foreign Office was aware of what was at stake when the Indian authorities approached the UK for help.
A week before the Golden Temple assault, Bruce Cleghorn, a diplomat, wrote that “it would be dangerous” for the UK government “to be identified” with “any attempt to storm the Golden Temple in Amritsar”. He was also named in correspondence discussing possible SAS assistance to India immediately after the massacre.
In 2015, Cleghorn became a Foreign Office “sensitivity reviewer” whose job involved censoring documents about the Amritsar massacre before they were released to the National Archives.
Sir John Ramsden, a member of the Advisory Council on National Records and Archives, which adjudicates on government censorship applications, was a member of the Foreign Office’s south Asia department in 1984. Ramsden wrote a letter advocating further SAS assistance for India immediately after Operation Blue Star and also argued in favour of equipping India’s paramilitary forces.
The role of the SAS officer in the days before Operation Blue Star are shrouded in secrecy as are the full extent of the fatalities. The Indian government puts the figure at about 400. Sikh groups say it was in the thousands.
According to the Sikh Federation’s report, immediately after the SAS officer carried out his reconnaissance with an Indian special forces unit, the Sikhs pulled out of peace talks believing they had seen a commando unit move into the city. The negotiations never recovered and eventually the Indian army stormed the temple in June 1984. Four months later, India’s prime minister Indira Gandhi was assassinated by one of her Sikh bodyguards, prompting reprisals that led to the deaths of more than 3,000 Sikhs.
The report suggests the UK was keen to help India because the country was one of its biggest purchasers of military equipment between 1981 and 1990. It also claims that repressive measures against Sikhs were carried out in the UK to appease the Indian government and secure arms deals.
“The government needs to finally come clean about Thatcher’s role in the Amritsar massacre and India’s crackdown on Sikhs,” said the report’s author, Phil Miller. “Whitehall censorship of historical files is like an old boys’ club that prevents the public from ever knowing how taxpayers’ money was spent. This culture of secrecy around Britain’s special forces and intelligence agencies is undemocratic and unsustainable.”
Bhai Amrik Singh, chair of the Sikh Federation (UK) said: “This report casts serious doubts on the adequacy and integrity of the inhouse Heywood review commissioned by Cameron. There has been a massive cover-up and parliament and the public have been disturbingly misled. An independent public inquiry to get to the truth is the only way forward.”
- This is the archive of The Observer up until 21/04/2025. The Observer is now owned and operated by Tortoise Media.
Explore more on these topics
Knock nock 
Leave a comment