Follow TNM's WhatsApp channel for news updates and story links.
The Union government, on Tuesday, January 6, informed the Madras High Court that film producers cannot insist on expeditious issuance of censor certificates solely on the basis of an announced release date. The court also directed the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) to place on record the complaint based on which Vijay-starrer Jana Nayagan was referred to a revising committee.
Justice Asha passed the direction while hearing a petition filed by KVN Productions LLP, seeking issuance of a censor certificate for the theatrical release of Jana Nayagan, scheduled for January 9.
Additional Solicitor General ARL Sundaresan, appearing for the Union government and the CBFC, submitted that “merely because film producers have announced the release date of the film, they cannot insist the authorities issue censor certificates expeditiously.” He informed the court that since the Board had not taken a final decision, the CBFC chairperson was empowered to refer the film to the revising committee, particularly after receiving a complaint against the movie.
Senior advocate Satish Parasaran, appearing for the producer, submitted that the application for certification was made on December 18, 2025, and that the Examining Committee had recommended the grant of a “UA 16+” certificate on December 22, subject to certain excisions and modifications.
The reason cited by the CBFC for the classification was the film’s “brief portrayal of religious sentiments” and “frequent and sustained fight sequences involving shooting, blasts and stabbing and gory visuals,” which were unsuitable for children below 16 years.
The producers complied with all suggested modifications and resubmitted the revised version on December 24. As per the submissions, the Regional Office of the CBFC verified the changes and informed the producer on December 29 that the movie would be granted a “UA” certificate.
However, on January 5, the producers were informed that the film had been referred to the revising committee under Rule 24 of the Cinematograph Certification Rules, following a complaint alleging that certain scenes hurt religious sentiments and objected to the portrayal of the armed forces.
Challenging the move, Parasaran argued that “issuance of certification cannot be delayed, and the reopening of the certification cannot be done on a vague, undisclosed complaint”. He further contended that the January 5 communication did not disclose “the identity of the complainant, the nature or particulars of the complaint or any supporting material,” and that reopening the process after certification had reached finality was arbitrary and contrary to law.
The producers also highlighted the financial implications of the delay, stating that nearly Rs 500 crore had been invested in the film and that it was planned for release in around 5,000 screens worldwide. They submitted that certification of the Tamil version was essential before proceeding with certification in other languages, and that any delay would cause irreparable financial and reputational harm.
Recording the rival submissions, Justice Asha directed the CBFC to produce all records, including the complaint received against the movie, and adjourned the matter for further hearing on Wednesday, January 7.