The Chief Justice of the Madras High Court has stayed the order passed by Justice Asha in connection with the release of the Tamil film Jana Nayagan, thereby continuing the embargo on the movie’s theatrical release. The Chief Justice has also adjourned the matter for further hearing till January 21, effectively extending the ban until a final decision is taken.
With the stay now in force, Jana Nayagan cannot be released unless and until the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) grants its approval. The court made it clear that statutory procedures under the Cinematograph Act must be fully complied with and that judicial intervention cannot override the censoring authority’s mandate.
The controversy revolves around delays in the issuance of a censor certificate for Jana Nayagan, a politically charged film starring actor Vijay. The producers had approached the Madras High Court alleging inordinate delay and selective scrutiny by the CBFC, arguing that the film had already complied with all required norms and that the delay amounted to an indirect restriction on creative expression.
Justice Asha, in an earlier order, had issued directions that were seen as facilitating the film’s release, triggering objections from the CBFC. The censor board contended that the order undermined its statutory powers and set a problematic precedent by allowing courts to bypass the certification process.
Challenging Justice Asha’s order, the CBFC moved the Chief Justice, asserting that film certification is a specialised statutory function entrusted solely to the board. The CBFC maintained that certification was still under examination due to the film’s sensitive political content and that due process could not be rushed under judicial pressure.
Accepting these arguments prima facie, the Chief Justice stayed the earlier order and restored the status quo, reiterating that no film can be exhibited publicly without prior certification.
The case will now be taken up for detailed hearing on January 21. Until then, the ban on Jana Nayagan remains in place, and its release is subject entirely to the CBFC granting clearance. The outcome of the case is being closely watched, as it is expected to have wider implications for artistic freedom, censorship norms, and the limits of judicial intervention in film certification.