Alleging “opprobrious visual artistic work designed against lawyers and the legal profession in the film," complaints were filed against Indian actor Vijay, as well as a producer and director for the way lawyers were portrayed in a movie. From "Vijay’s problem comes to an end" (India Glitz):
Justice R Ragupathi observed that the film industry had social and moral responsibilities and it was expected that they would produce good and healthy artistic material for the public that would not corrupt the minds of the public and tear the fine fabric of co-existence of different sections of people.
...
Justice Ragupathi said that the objectionable scenes were removed on realising that the legal profession had been, to a considerable extent, degraded.
From "HC for strict censoring of TV content" (Times of India):
Justice R Regupathi, quash[ed] defamation proceedings initiated against actor Vijay in various courts of Tamil Nadu ... .
He was passing orders on the petitions filed by Vijay, producer of Sivakasi' AM Rathinam and its director Perarasu, who sought quashing of over a dozen defamation proceedings initiated by advocates in different courts. Advocates, represented by S Prabakaran, claimed the film "scornfully ridiculed" the legal profession. During the hearing, the crew apologised for the scenes and said objectionable portions had already been deleted.
Recording the apology, the judge quashed the complaints, but with an observation: "The film industry too has social and moral responsibilities... Of late, it is irritating to note that corruptive, pointless and irresponsible messages are being conveyed through movies in the name of entertainment."
Comments