The First Division Bench of the Madras High Court is all set to deliver its verdict on Tuesday (January 27, 2026) on an appeal filed by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) against a single judge’s January 9, 2026 decision to grant a U/A 16+ certificate to actor Vijay Janay’s much-anticipated final film.
Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice G. Arul Murugan will deliver the verdict, which they reserved on January 20, 2026 after hearing Additional Solicitor General (ASG) AR.L. Sundaresan for CBFC and Senior Counsel Satish Parasaran, assisted by Vijayan Subramanian, for KVN Productions LLP.
During the course of arguments, the Division Bench insisted that both sides first submit their submissions on the preliminary question whether the Single Judge was entitled to dispose of the production house’s writ petition by simply calling for production of records and without giving the CBFC an opportunity to file a counter-affidavit.
The bench also wanted to know whether the single judge was right in quashing the January 6, 2026 decision of the CBFC chairman to refer the film to a nine-member review panel, though the production company did not file a writ of certiorari challenging the decision but only sought an injunction directing the five-member panel to issue a U/A 16+ test.
After presenting his submissions on the two preliminary issues, the counsel proceeded to hear them on the merits of the case, with the production house challenging the authority of the CBFC chairman to refer the film to the review board after the board of examiners had recommended issuing a U/A 16+ certificate and the CBFC claimed that the chairman was empowered to do so.
During arguments, Mr. Sundaresan said that the production company filed its writ petition on January 6, 2026 and the single judge heard it in the afternoon of the same day after granting the petition over lunch. Thereafter, the CBFC was directed to produce the records on January 7, 2026, when the judge perused the documents and heard the orders of both parties and reserved orders for the suit.
Then, orders were issued on January 9, 2026, which not only directed the CBFC to issue a U/A 16+ certificate, but also quashed the decision of the CBFC chairman, which was uploaded on the e-cinepramaan portal on January 6, though it was not challenged at all by the production house, ASG complained. He also said the board was not given an opportunity to file a detailed counter-affidavit.
Also read | ‘Jana Nayagan’: Why ‘Thalapathy’ Vijay’s ‘Bhagavanth Kesari’ remix trick could be a winner?
On the other hand, Mr. Parasaran told the court that the production company had applied to the CBFC under the Tatkal scheme as early as December 18, 2025 and had publicly announced that the film would be released on January 9, 2026. The screening committee had viewed the film on December 19, 2025 and all five members had decided to issue the U16+unisani certificate.
The screening committee’s recommendation was forwarded to the production house on December 22, 2025. The latter immediately accepted the recommendation and excised the film before resubmitting the film on December 24, 2025. However, there was silence and lack of response from the board despite repeated reminders from the producers to issue the certification.
Suddenly, on 5 January 2026, the production was informed that the CBFC chairman had decided to refer the film to the review board and therefore rushed to the court with a writ petition on 6 January 2026. It was only in the court that the CBFC revealed that the reference was made on the basis of a complaint received by the CBFC chairman from one screening committee.
He also questioned how a member who had recorded his impressions and recommendations immediately after watching the film on 19 December 2025 could subsequently send a complaint to the Chairman stating that the film had several references to the Indian Army but there was no expert on the subject in the screening committee and that there were also some scenes related to religious conflict.
Mr. Parasaran said that the production house had edited all the visuals as per the review board’s recommendations and it would be absurd for the expert producers to re-introduce those parts back into the film before submitting it to the review board for review.
Published – 23 Jan 2026 20:32 IST
