Madras High Court said Vijay’s film Jana Nayagan allegedly contains references to foreign forces provoking internal conflict, potentially disturbing communal harmony, requiring verification. Setting aside a single judge order, the court halted CBFC’s direction to grant certification, delaying release.
CHENNAI: The Madras High Court stated that actor Vijay’s film “Jana Nayagan” reportedly includes references to foreign entities inciting conflict within the country, which could potentially “disturb communal harmony,”. This necessitates further verification before the film can be screened.
In a setback for the release of this high-budget movie, the High Court recently set aside a single judge’s ruling instructing the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) to promptly issue a censor certificate for the film.
The First Bench, consisting of Chief Justice M. M. Shrivastava and Justice G. Arul Murugan, ruled on January 27, allowing the writ appeal filed by the CBFC. This appeal challenged a January 9, 2026 order from Justice P. T. Asha that quashed the Chairperson of the CBFC’s decision to refer the case to the Revising Committee.
The bench stated,
“From the records, as produced by the appellants, which we had perused during the course of hearing, it appears that the basis for referring the film for examination by the Revising Committee, a larger body, was due to visuals and dialogues depicting foreign powers instigating religious conflict on a large scale in India, which may disturb religious harmony. Additionally, there are many references related to the Army, but no defense expert has been included…to address these issues,”
The judges noted that the issues raised were serious and warranted thorough verification before screening. This was the primary reason the CBFC Chairperson opted to refer the film to the Revising Committee. The bench emphasized that the appellants should have been given an adequate opportunity to file their counter-affidavit and support the Chairperson’s decision.
The bench ruled that the proper opportunity was not provided to the appellants, and the writ petition was not maintainable unless it sought a writ of certiorari to annul the Chairperson’s decision. Consequently, the single judge’s ruling that examined the merits of the case had to be reversed. The court chose not to delve further into the merits, leaving that aspect open for future consideration.
The court observed,
“As an upshot of the above discussion, the appeal is allowed, and the impugned order passed by the Single Judge is set aside. However, in light of the circumstances and in the interest of justice, rather than dismissing the writ petition, we are inclined to give the writ petitioner/respondent (M/s KVN Productions LLP, producer of the film ‘Jana Nayagan’) an opportunity to suitably amend the writ petition in view of the observations made herein above.”
The bench concluded,
“The writ petition is restored to its original records and file. If the respondent suitably amends the writ petition, the Single Judge may provide a reasonable opportunity for the appellants (CBFC) to file a counter-affidavit, after which the parties may seek an expeditious resolution of the writ petition based on its merits. We clarify that it remains within the Single Judge’s discretion to determine whether the decision to refer the film for examination by the Revising Committee was lawful,”
Case Title: KVN Productions LLP v. Central Board of Film Certification SLP(C) No. 1800/2026