Skip to content

    Madras High Court Sets Aside Order Directing 'U/A' Certificate for Vijay's 'Jana Nayagan'; Sends Matter for Fresh Hearing

    News

    1. Home
    2. /News

    Madras High Court Sets Aside Order Directing 'U/A' Certificate for Vijay's 'Jana Nayagan'; Sends Matter for Fresh Hearing

    Madras High Court sets aside order for 'U/A' certificate for Vijay's 'Jana Nayagan,' citing natural justice lapses; directs fresh hearing for CBFC to respond.

    Manjit Thakur
    Jan 27, 2026·4 min read
    Madras High Court Sets Aside Order Directing 'U/A' Certificate for Vijay's 'Jana Nayagan'; Sends Matter for Fresh Hearing

    In a significant development for the Tamil film industry and followers of actor-politician Vijay, the Madras High Court on Tuesday (January 27) set aside a single-judge order that had directed the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) to grant a ‘U/A’ certificate to the movie Jana Nayagan.

    A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice G. Arul Murugan ruled that the previous order was passed without following the principles of natural justice. The court has now sent the case back to the single judge for a fresh hearing, ensuring that the CBFC is given a proper opportunity to file its response and defend its decision.

    The legal tussle began when the movie’s producer, KVN Productions, approached the court against the CBFC for delaying the film’s certification. Jana Nayagan, which is widely reported to be Actor Vijay’s final film before his full-scale entry into politics, was originally slated for a Pongal release on January 9.

    According to the producers:

    Advertisement
    1. The film was screened for the Examining Committee (EC) in December.
    2. The board informed them that a ‘U/A’ certificate would be granted provided certain cuts and modifications were made.
    3. The producers carried out these changes and expected the certificate to follow.

    However, in a sudden turn of events, the CBFC Chairperson decided to refer the movie to a Revising Committee for a second look. This decision was reportedly based on a complaint from a member of the original Examining Committee, alleging that certain scenes could hurt religious sentiments and portrayed the Indian armed forces in a negative light.

    On January 9, a single-judge bench ruled in favor of the producers. The judge criticized the CBFC’s move to send the film for review after already indicating that a certificate would be issued. The single judge held that once the Examining Committee had made its recommendation, the Chairperson’s decision to reopen the matter based on a post-facto complaint was "without jurisdiction" (beyond their legal authority).

    The CBFC was directed to issue the certificate immediately. However, within hours, the CBFC moved the Division Bench, which stayed the single judge’s order, citing that the Board was not given enough time to file a formal reply (counter-affidavit).

    In its detailed judgment today, the Division Bench noted several procedural lapses in the single judge’s handling of the case:

    1. Violation of Natural Justice: The court emphasized that the CBFC was not given a fair chance to explain why the movie was sent for review. The Bench noted that "natural justice principles were not followed" as the Board was not allowed to file a counter-affidavit.
    2. Serious Allegations: The Bench observed that the complaints against the movie—specifically regarding religious harmony and the depiction of the military—were of a "serious nature." Given these stakes, the court felt it was essential for the CBFC to be heard.
    3. Challenging the Right Order: The court pointed out a technical legal flaw: the producers had asked for a "Mandamus" (a direction to issue the certificate) but had not officially challenged the Chairperson’s administrative order that sent the movie to the Revising Committee. The Bench has now given KVN Productions the liberty to amend their petition to challenge that specific order.

    During the hearings, Additional Solicitor General ARL Sundaresan, representing the CBFC, argued that the Board is the ultimate authority and is not strictly bound by the preliminary opinion of an advisory panel if serious concerns are raised later.

    On the other side, Senior Advocates Satish Parasaran and Pradeep Rai, appearing for the producers, argued that the Board was acting inconsistently. They pointed out that the scenes mentioned in the complaint had already been edited or deleted. They contended that sending the film to a Revising Committee was a "redundant exercise" intended to delay the film’s release.

    The "fresh hearing" direction means the case is effectively starting over at the single-judge level.

    1. For the Producers: They will now amend their legal challenge to specifically target the Chairperson’s review order.
    2. For the CBFC: They will file a detailed response explaining the necessity of the Revising Committee.
    3. For the Fans: The release date of Jana Nayagan remains uncertain. While the High Court’s order is not a ban, the lack of a censor certificate means the film cannot hit screens just yet.

    The Division Bench also took the opportunity to remark on the "artificial urgency" created by production houses who announce release dates before obtaining a final certificate, noting that such pressure should not be placed on the judicial system.

    1. Case Title: Central Board of Film Certification and another v. KVN Productions LLP
    2. Case No: W.A.No.94 of 2026

    Explore related legal coverage

    Continue with reporting and analysis connected to this article.

    Browse News

    More from this court

    • Madras High Court Urges Centre to Consider 'Australia-Style' Law to Protect Children from Online Harm

      Madras High Court

    • Roads Have No Religious Character, Madras HC Says

      Madras High Court

    • Madras HC: Adoption Deed Executed by Grandparents Valid If Mother Consents; JJ Act Not Applicable to HAMA Adoptions

      Madras High Court

    • ‘Absolute Abuse of Power’: Madras High Court Quashes TN Govt Order to Collect Sensitive Personal Data of School Students

      Madras High Court

    Related legal topics

    • Madras High Court Directs High Court Seeks Status Report on Missing Tamil Pilgrims in Nepal Floods

      Justice G. Arul Murugan

    • Lalu Yadav, Rabri Devi, and Tejashwi Yadav to Face Trial as Delhi Court Frames Charges in IRCTC Scam

      News

    Advertisement

    Manjit Thakur

    Law Student | Passionate about Advocacy, Legal Research & Social Justice | Future Litigator

    See more from Manjit →
    Jurisight logoJurisight logo

    Simplifying legal knowledge for professionals and citizens. Your daily source for Supreme Court, High Court, and Business Law updates.

    Platform

    HomeAll ArticlesTop NewsSC UpdatesHC Updates

    Categories

    Business LawConstitutionalCriminal LawCivil LawKnow Your Law

    Weekly Digest

    Join 15,000+ others and get the week's most important legal updates.

    © 2026 Jurisight. All rights reserved.
    Privacy PolicyCookie PolicyCookie ConsentLegal Disclaimer