Tue Jan 20 12:01:17 UTC 2026: # Madras High Court Reserves Order on Certification Dispute for Vijay’s “Jana Nayagan”

The Story:
The Madras High Court has reserved its order on a writ appeal filed by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) regarding the certification of actor Vijay’s highly anticipated final film, “Jana Nayagan.” This legal battle follows a single judge’s order instructing the CBFC to issue a U/A 16+ certificate. The Division Bench, consisting of Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice G. Arul Murugan, heard arguments from both sides, with Additional Solicitor General A.R.L. Sundaresan representing the CBFC and senior counsel Satish Parasaran, assisted by Vijayan Subramanian, representing KVN Productions LLP.

The case has drawn considerable attention, particularly after the Supreme Court declined to intervene with the interim stay granted to the single judge’s order but urged the High Court to expedite its decision. The controversy stems from the CBFC’s initial recommendation of a U/A 16+ certificate following excisions, a recommendation that was later reversed, leading to the legal challenge by the production house.

Key Points:

  • A single judge initially ordered the CBFC to issue a U/A 16+ certificate for “Jana Nayagan” on January 9, 2026.
  • The CBFC filed a writ appeal, resulting in an interim stay of the single judge’s order.
  • The Supreme Court declined to interfere with the interim stay but requested an expedited decision from the Division Bench.
  • The CBFC initially recommended U/A 16+ certification on December 22, 2025, after excisions were made based on the examining committee’s recommendations.
  • A member of the examining committee later lodged a complaint about the lack of an army expert, leading to a referral to a revising committee, a decision contested by the production house.
  • Justice P.T. Asha criticized the committee member’s change of stance as an “afterthought” and “motivated”.
  • Political figures like Rahul Gandhi and Chief Minister Stalin have accused the central government of political interference in the film’s certification.

Critical Analysis:

This event series reveals a pattern of potential political interference in the certification of “Jana Nayagan”. The timing of the CBFC’s reversal and the subsequent legal battles, combined with public statements from prominent political figures accusing the central government of censorship, suggest that forces beyond standard film certification procedures may be at play. This is further supported by Justice Asha’s questioning of the member’s sudden volte face, suggesting external pressures influencing the process.

Key Takeaways:

  • The certification process for “Jana Nayagan” has become entangled in legal and political controversies.
  • The CBFC’s decision-making process is under scrutiny, with accusations of potential bias and external influence.
  • The case highlights the increasing politicization of film certification in India.
  • The judiciary is playing a critical role in mediating disputes between filmmakers and the CBFC.
  • The delay in the film’s release has garnered significant public and media attention.

Impact Analysis:

The outcome of this case could have significant implications for film censorship and creative freedom in India. If the High Court upholds the single judge’s order, it could set a precedent for challenging CBFC decisions perceived as politically motivated. Conversely, if the Court sides with the CBFC, it could embolden the board to exert greater control over film content, potentially stifling artistic expression. The accusations of political interference could damage the credibility of the CBFC and fuel further debate on the role of government in regulating artistic content. The delayed release of “Jana Nayagan” is likely to impact not only the film’s commercial success but also the political narratives surrounding it.

Read More

Related News: