'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

Share this

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 1:21 PM IST
ASG shows that the communication regarding sending the movie to revising committee was also uploaded in the e-cinepraman.
CJ: This order has been quashed?
ASG: Yes, this communication has been quashed
20 Jan 2026 1:19 PM IST
CJ: In the single judge's order this has been mentioned?
ASG: Yes
CJ: So it was brought to the court's notice?
ASG: Yes, your honour.
20 Jan 2026 1:18 PM IST
ASG: A reasonable time should have been given to me to respond on facts and law.
ASG says that before the writ was taken up by the court, the producers had knowledge of 5/1 communication, sending movie for review
20 Jan 2026 1:16 PM IST
ASG says in the present case, the producers decided to release the movie on a particular day and then argued that if more time is granted, they would suffer as they have invested 500 crores.
ASG: They could not have decided the release date beforehand.
20 Jan 2026 1:14 PM IST
ASG: the lunch motion is granted. Papers are served. But so far as counter is concerned if not 8 weeks, a short period of 1-2 days should have been granted.
20 Jan 2026 1:12 PM IST
ASG:.. respondent who wants to file counter, unless otherwise ordered, shall file the counter within 8 weeks and this can be extended by the court..
20 Jan 2026 1:10 PM IST
CJ: The main issue that we need to consider is whether the opposite side was given sufficient time. Whether the matter could have been decided in 1 day. If we think yes, then only we need to go into the merits
ASG takes the court through writ rules
20 Jan 2026 1:08 PM IST
CJ: The letter dated 22/11 says the board has decided. So the committee had sent it to the board?
ASG: Yes. After it was sent, there was a low signal that the movie would be certified. But then the decision was put on hold after complaint was received
20 Jan 2026 1:06 PM IST
CJ: This recommendation has to be sent in 3 weeks. Was it sent here?
ASG: yes your honour.
CJ: But the chairperson has not decided?
ASG: The issue between us is that the Chairperson has not taken a decision
20 Jan 2026 1:04 PM IST
ASG: Sub Rule 13, the Examining Officer shall get the recommendation of all officers in unequivocal terms... recommendations are sent to the authority depending on length. If it is more than 72 minutes, it is sent to the chairperson of board

Next Updates Previous Updates

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

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Live Updates

ASG shows that the communication regarding sending the movie to revising committee was also uploaded in the e-cinepraman. CJ: This order has been quashed? ASG: Yes, this communication has been quashed

CJ: In the single judge's order this has been mentioned? ASG: Yes CJ: So it was brought to the court's notice? ASG: Yes, your honour.

ASG: A reasonable time should have been given to me to respond on facts and law. ASG says that before the writ was taken up by the court, the producers had knowledge of 5/1 communication, sending movie for review

ASG says in the present case, the producers decided to release the movie on a particular day and then argued that if more time is granted, they would suffer as they have invested 500 crores. ASG: They could not have decided the release date beforehand.

ASG: the lunch motion is granted. Papers are served. But so far as counter is concerned if not 8 weeks, a short period of 1-2 days should have been granted.

ASG:.. respondent who wants to file counter, unless otherwise ordered, shall file the counter within 8 weeks and this can be extended by the court..

CJ: The main issue that we need to consider is whether the opposite side was given sufficient time. Whether the matter could have been decided in 1 day. If we think yes, then only we need to go into the merits ASG takes the court through writ rules

CJ: The letter dated 22/11 says the board has decided. So the committee had sent it to the board? ASG: Yes. After it was sent, there was a low signal that the movie would be certified. But then the decision was put on hold after complaint was received

CJ: This recommendation has to be sent in 3 weeks. Was it sent here? ASG: yes your honour. CJ: But the chairperson has not decided? ASG: The issue between us is that the Chairperson has not taken a decision

ASG: Sub Rule 13, the Examining Officer shall get the recommendation of all officers in unequivocal terms... recommendations are sent to the authority depending on length. If it is more than 72 minutes, it is sent to the chairperson of board

ASG shows that the communication regarding sending the movie to revising committee was also uploaded in the e-cinepraman.
CJ: This order has been quashed?
ASG: Yes, this communication has been quashed

CJ: In the single judge's order this has been mentioned?
ASG: Yes
CJ: So it was brought to the court's notice?
ASG: Yes, your honour.

ASG: A reasonable time should have been given to me to respond on facts and law.
ASG says that before the writ was taken up by the court, the producers had knowledge of 5/1 communication, sending movie for review

ASG says in the present case, the producers decided to release the movie on a particular day and then argued that if more time is granted, they would suffer as they have invested 500 crores.
ASG: They could not have decided the release date beforehand.

CJ: The main issue that we need to consider is whether the opposite side was given sufficient time. Whether the matter could have been decided in 1 day. If we think yes, then only we need to go into the merits
ASG takes the court through writ rules

CJ: The letter dated 22/11 says the board has decided. So the committee had sent it to the board?
ASG: Yes. After it was sent, there was a low signal that the movie would be certified. But then the decision was put on hold after complaint was received

CJ: This recommendation has to be sent in 3 weeks. Was it sent here?
ASG: yes your honour.
CJ: But the chairperson has not decided?
ASG: The issue between us is that the Chairperson has not taken a decision