A single judge of the Madras High Court on Friday (January 9, 2026) allowed a writ petition filed by KVN Productions LLP and ordered the issuance of U/A 16+ certificate to actor Vijay-starrer Jana Nayagan. The Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), however, made an immediate mention before the Chief Justice’s Bench for an urgent hearing of a writ appeal to be filed against the order.
First Division Bench of Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice G. Arul Murugan agreed to consider the request made by Additional Solicitor General AR.L. Sundaresan for an urgent hearing of the CBFC’s writ appeal against the order passed by Justice P.T. Asha, who had directed the board to issue the certificate forthwith so that the movie could be released during Pongal.
The Chief Justice’s Bench is expected to hear the appeal on Friday afternoon, if the case gets numbered by then, or on Monday (January 12). The production firm had approached the court complaining that an examining committee of the CBFC had recommended the issuance of U/A 16+ certificate but the board’s chairman had unilaterally decided to send the movie for review to a revising committee.
Senior counsel Satish Parasaran, assisted by Vijayan Subramanian, had argued that the producers had invested around ₹500 crore in the production of the movie and had also announced that it would be released worldwide on January 9, but all their plans were spoiled because the CBFC conveyed its decision – to not accept the examining committee’s recommendation – to the producers only on January 5.
He said, the movie was submitted for certification as early as December 18 and yet, the CBFC chose not to issue the certificate until the last moment. On the other hand, the ASG, representing the CBFC told the court that one of the five members of the examining committee had sent a complaint to the CBFC chairman stating that his objections were not considered properly before making the recommendation.
The ASG also stated that the Cinematograph (Certification) Rules of 2024 empower the board’s chairman to refer a movie to the revising committee if he/she was not satisfied with the recommendations made by the examining committee. He said, the court could not issue a positive direction to the board for the issuance of the certificate and that it could only be directed to perform its statutory duty within a time limit.
Curated by Shiv Shakti Mishra
