Fri Jan 09 13:50:00 UTC 2026: Headline: Madras High Court Criticizes CBFC Over “Jana Nayagan” Certification U-Turn, Orders Immediate UA Certificate

The Story: The Madras High Court has strongly criticized the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) for attempting to retract its initial recommendation to grant a “UA” certificate to the Vijay-starrer film “Jana Nayagan.” Justice PT Asha raised concerns about the precedent this sets, potentially undermining the CBFC’s decision-making process. The controversy arose after an Examining Committee member filed a complaint alleging that the film hurts religious sensibilities and contains objectionable portrayals of the armed forces, despite the committee initially recommending the UA certificate with specific excisions and modifications.

Key Points:

  • The Madras High Court flagged a “dangerous trend” of CBFC members retracting certification recommendations.
  • The controversy centers around the Vijay-starrer film “Jana Nayagan.”
  • An Examining Committee member claimed his objections regarding religious sensibilities and portrayal of the armed forces were not considered.
  • The court deemed the complainant’s grievance an “afterthought” and “motivated.”
  • The court ruled that the CBFC Chairperson’s power to send the movie for review ended once the decision to grant a UA certificate (subject to modifications) was communicated to the producers on December 22, 2025.
  • The court ordered the CBFC to grant the “UA” certificate “forthwith.”
  • An appeal against the single judge’s direction will be heard at 3:30 PM IST on January 9, 2026.

Critical Analysis:
The timeline suggests a concerted effort to delay or block the release of “Jana Nayagan.” The initial UA recommendation, followed by a complaint and subsequent review, indicates internal disagreement within the CBFC. Given Vijay’s transition into politics, as noted in one of the context snippets, the objections regarding religious sensibilities and the portrayal of the armed forces might be politically motivated, aiming to censor or delay the film’s release due to its potential influence on public opinion. The court’s sharp rebuke implies a recognition of these potential motives.

Key Takeaways:

  • The judiciary is actively safeguarding the integrity of the CBFC’s certification process.
  • Political motivations may be influencing film certification decisions, especially concerning films starring prominent political figures.
  • The Madras High Court is willing to exercise its inherent jurisdiction to ensure fair and timely film certifications.
  • Internal disagreements within the CBFC can significantly impact the release of films.
  • The swift appeal indicates the high stakes and the determination of opposing forces to challenge the court’s decision.

Impact Analysis:

This case has potentially significant implications for the film industry and censorship practices in India. If the High Court’s decision is upheld, it will strengthen the position of filmmakers against arbitrary delays and censorship. The court’s intervention also serves as a warning to the CBFC to maintain transparency and consistency in its certification process. The outcome of the appeal will further clarify the extent to which political considerations can influence film certification decisions. More broadly, this case contributes to the ongoing debate about freedom of expression and the role of the state in regulating artistic content.

Read More

Related News: