Jana Nayagan movie release date: Setback for Vijay; Madras HC stays order directing CBFC to grant censor certificate

The Madras High Court on Friday put on hold a single-judge directive that had instructed the Censor Board to issue a UA certificate for Vijay’s film Jana Nayagan. The matter has now been scheduled for further hearing on 21 January, following the Pongal holidays, news agency PTI reported.

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice G Arul Murugan granted the stay after Additional Solicitor General (ASG) ARL Sundaresan and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta (appearing through video conferencing) outlined the grounds for appeal by the CBFC and argued the matter.

Earlier on Friday, the Madras High Court had instructed the CBFC to issue a U/A 16+ certificate to Vijay’s film Jana Nayagan. Soon after this order, the CBFC moved the high court with an urgent appeal challenging the decision of the single judge.

Following the appeal, a Division Bench of the Madras High Court stepped in and placed a temporary stay on the earlier order passed the same day.

The Division Bench, consisting of Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice G Arul Murugan, noted procedural concerns while dictating its order. The bench observed, “Respondent Union of India was not given sufficient time… one main grievance of the Union of India was that they were not given time to reply. Another grievance is that the letter dated January 6 was not challenged, but the court (single judge) quashed it. Respondents argue that there was no urgency… All said and done, there was no certificate granted to the respondents.”

As reported by Live Law, during the hearing, the Chief Justice questioned the CBFC on why the appeal was filed urgently. Responding to this, the ASG argued that the proceedings before the single judge were conducted in haste and that the CBFC was not given adequate time to present its case.

The ASG further pointed out that the producers of Jana Nayagan had applied for certification only on 18 December and that the film was subsequently referred to the review committee for examination.

Producers defend film, court questions urgency

Representing the producers, KVN Productions, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi told the court that the complaint against the film had been filed by a member of the CBFC committee itself. Questioning the speed at which the matter was handled, the Chief Justice asked, “What was the urgency that the respondent (Board) was asked to respond to the plea and the matter was decided within 2 days?”

When Rohatgi explained that the film was scheduled for a 9 January release, the bench remarked that the producers could have waited for certification before fixing a release date.

Addressing Rohatgi directly, the court said, “You’re creating an urgency and putting pressure on court. False state of urgency is being created, saying that ‘we have to release the movie on such date’… 6th January order is not under challenge and it has been challenged. How can you go ahead with the release of the movie without even a certificate on hand? You can’t fix a date (for release) and put pressure on the system.”