Madras HC Hears CBFC in Jana Nayagan Censor Row
Madras HC Hears CBFC in Jana Nayagan Censor Row
Madras High Court reserves its order as CBFC and filmmakers clash over Jana Nayagan certification, highlighting procedural gaps and response timing.
The Madras High Court reserved its order after a long hearing on the CBFC’s writ appeal challenging a single judge’s directive to grant a UA 16+ rating to the Vijay-starrer Jana Nayagan. The board argued that the earlier order was passed without giving CBFC a proper chance to present its case, including a challenge to the January 6 communication from the CBFC chairperson and the December 22 recommendation from the examining committee. The central point, the ASG contended, is that the material before the court did not reflect a final statutory decision and that CBFC should have been allowed to file a counter affidavit. The advocate for the CBFC emphasized that the Revising Committee route was not properly invoked as a final decision, and that the court should consider whether due process was followed in granting or withholding certification.
The hearing, before a bench comprising the chief justice and another judge, focused on whether the CBFC followed proper procedures when issuing and potentially revoking film certification, and whether producers were given adequate time to respond. The case centers on Jana Nayagan, directed by H Vinoth and starring actor Vijay, who has recently launched a political party, Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK). The film has been widely viewed as Vijay’s last cinematic outing before his full-time entry into electoral politics, intensifying interest in the court’s ruling. While the proceedings examined technicalities of certification, observers noted the broader implications for how controversial cinema and political actors interact with the certification process in Tamil Nadu.
As the arguments closed, the bench reserved its decision, underscoring ongoing tensions between regulatory procedure and artistic release timelines. A final order will determine whether Jana Nayagan can proceed with a particular certification, or whether further steps are required under the Cinematograph (Certification) Rules. The outcome could influence how similar cases are handled in the future and shape the landscape of film certification in the region.
