Kerala High Court Today (June 25) heard petition against delay in censor certificate for ‘Janaki v State of Kerala’ starring Union Minister Suresh Gopi. The film, scheduled to release on June 27, faces issues over its title and character name.
Today, On 4th October, Kangana Ranaut’s film Emergency received approval from the Bombay High Court to implement suggested cuts over one month, allowing case closure. The Central Board of Film Certification will review the revised film within two weeks, following the agreement between Manikarnika Films and the CBFC regarding concerns about content.
Today, On 3rd October, Zee Entertainment has informed the Bombay High Court that it is addressing certification issues with the CBFC regarding the film “Emergency.” Delayed from its original release on September 6 due to disputes, the film’s release may proceed if specific cuts are made. The court is monitoring the situation closely, with further hearings scheduled.
Today, On 30th September, Kangana Ranaut agreed to make cuts to her film Emergency, as confirmed by the CBFC to the Bombay High Court. The film faced controversy over its portrayal of the Sikh community. The court hearing was adjourned until October 3 for further assurances regarding the edits and release certification.
![[Setback For Kangana Ranaut] ‘Emergency’ to Miss Sept 6 Release: HC Refuses to Direct CBFC to Issue Censor Certificate Immediately](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/image-14-1.png?resize=400%2C225&ssl=1)
The film “Emergency,” produced by Kangana Ranaut, faces controversy as Sikh organizations challenge its release. The Bombay High Court refuses to direct the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) to issue a certificate, making the film’s release uncertain. Concerns about misrepresentation of Sikhs and potential community sentiments arise, prompting legal actions in multiple high courts.
Today (22nd April): The Supreme Court set aside the NCDRC’s order involving Yash Raj Films and the song “Jabra Fan.” The dispute arose when a consumer sought compensation for the song’s absence in the movie “Fan.” YRF successfully argued that the consumer did not qualify as a consumer and had publicly disclosed the song’s exclusion before the movie’s release.