'Jana Nayagan' Movie Case : Live Updates From Madras High Court Hearing | CBFC Appeal against Vijay's Film

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

20 Jan 2026 11:19 AM IST

  • Jana Nayagan Movie Case : Live Updates From Madras High Court Hearing | CBFC Appeal against Vijays Film
    Listen to this Article

    The Madras High Court will continue hearing today an appeal filed by the CBFC challenging a single judge's order asking it to give U/A certificate for the 'JanaNayagan' movie starring Tamil actor-politician Vijay.

    The bench of Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice G Arul Murugan will hear the appeal. On January 9th, a single judge had directed the CBFC to forthwith certify the movie. However, the division bench stayed the single bench's order the same day evening.

    Though this order was challenged in the Supreme Court by producer KVN Production, the Court refused to interfere, noting that the High Court was scheduled to hear the matter on January 20.

    Follow this page for live updates from the hearing.

    Live Updates

    • 20 Jan 2026 3:01 PM IST

      Parasaran says that as per the Rules, the Regional Committee was to inform the decision of the chairperson. Says in the present case, the regional office informed that it was decided to certify movie subject to incisions and if there was any challenge to the incisions, it could be challenged

    • 20 Jan 2026 3:00 PM IST

      Parasaran takes the court through the pleadings before the single judge.

      Parasaran: What is taken as recommendation, it is an order passed by the board under Rule 24.

    • 20 Jan 2026 2:58 PM IST

      Parasaran: As per rules, the certificate is to be issued within 2 days of communication.

    • 20 Jan 2026 2:56 PM IST

      Parasaran says after this intimation, the producers moved the court. All materials were placed before the single judge, who then considered the issue

    • 20 Jan 2026 2:55 PM IST

      Parasaran says the impugned communication said that the Chairman had decided to withdraw earlier decision.

      Says the 5/1 intimation said that then movie was being sent to revising committee based on a complaint alleging that religious sentiments were hurt

    • 20 Jan 2026 2:53 PM IST

      Parasaran says the incisions were made on 25/12 and sent to the committee. Parasaran says that to maintain transparency, all communications have to be informed to the applicant and uploaded on e-cinepraman. Adds that all communications after 29/12 were not uploaded

    • 20 Jan 2026 2:51 PM IST

      Parasaran takes the court through facts. Says on 18/12 the producerade tatkal application for expeditious consideration. On 19/12, the committee examined and on 22/12, intimation was given that the committee would certify subject to incisions

    • 20 Jan 2026 2:50 PM IST

      Parasaran says that the single judge was informed. That the court had quashed the communication

      CJ: If the communication only is quashed, how can we say that the board has been asked to certify?

      Parasaran says he will elaborate 

    • 20 Jan 2026 2:47 PM IST

      CJ: Was this informed to the single judge? There's nothing in the order showing that it was a communication. We have to go by what you're saying

    • 20 Jan 2026 2:46 PM IST

      Parasaran: They are asking me to challenge an order which is not given to me. Please see their typed set. They themself say that it is a communication by regional office

    Next Story