Posters by Jana Nayagan. File | Photo credit: Moorthy M.
The Supreme Court on Thursday (Jan 15, 2026) refused to hear a petition filed by Vijay-starrer Jana Nayagan’s production house against the stay order issued by the Madras High Court division on the film’s certification.
A bench headed by Justice Dipankar Datta questioned the “frantic pace” at which the single judge directed the issuance of the censor certificate on January 9. The bench said the producer did not even challenge the January 6 order of the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) chairman to send the film to the review board.
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi told KVN that his client was “ruined”.
“But why do you say that?” Justice Datta asked the senior counsel.
Mr Rohatgi said films and the publicity surrounding them were “perishable goods”.
“If it (the film) is delayed, people will lose interest. It will lose value. I have lost everything,” lamented Mr. Rohatgi.
The court asked Mr. Rohatgi to raise his arguments before the bench of the Madras High Court. She asked the Supreme Court to rule on the pending petition, which was presented to her on January 20.
A two-judge bench of the Supreme Court stayed the single-judge decision to issue a U/A 16+ certificate to the film just hours after it was cleared on January 9.
Editorial | Cuts and ratings:
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta represented the CBFC and its regional officer before the Supreme Court.
The CBFC countered that one of the five members of the examination board had sent a complaint to the CBFC chairman that his objections were not properly considered before the recommendation was issued.
She argued that the Cinematography (Certification) Rules, 2024 authorized the chairman to refer a film to a review committee if he disagreed with the examination committee’s recommendation. The Board argued that judicial review of the merits of issuing censor certificates was limited.
Published – 15 Jan 2026 11:53 IST
