#JanaNayagan Judgement Day tomorrow: What are the scoring points in favour of the producer?
1. In the writ petition filed before the single judge on January 6, KVN Productions had sought a direction to CBFC to issue the U/A 16+ certificate specifically within 24 hours. (Though this is not a major point in favour of the producer, it can still have a persuasive value to argue that there was an urgency in view of the high financial stakes involved in the case and hence the single judge had heard the matter quickly and ordered issuance of the certificate forthwith.)
2. As per Rule 23(11) of the Cinematograph (Certification) Rules, 2024, the members of the examining committee must record their opinion in writing in Form VIII immediately after watching the movie and before leaving the preview theatre. In the form, they must specify whether the movie could be given U, U/A, A or S certificate.
3. The 2024 Rules do not permit the members to go home, think over it leisurely and then express their opinion. One of the reasons for insisting upon recording of opinion before leaving the preview theatre is to ensure that the members do not get influenced by any other external factors before expressing their opinion.
4. In the case of #JanaNayagan, all five members of the examining committee had watched the movie on December 19 and expressed their opinion in writing that it could be granted U/A 16+ certificate subject to certain excisions. The production house had accepted the examining committee's decision and carried out the excisions though it had the option of rejecting it and going on appeal to a nine-member revising committee in order to obtain a U certificate.
5. The opinions expressed by the examining committee was placed before the board by the Regional Officer and thereafter, he had communicated to the producer on December 22, 2025 that "the board" had decided to accept the unanimous (and not just a majority opinion) recommendation of the examining committee to issue U/A 16+ certificate.
6. Thereafter, the production house had carried out the excisions and submitted the edited movie on December 24, 2025. After this what remained was just the ministerial work of issuing the certificate.
7. However, on January 5, 2025, the CBFC Regional Officer suddenly informed the production house that the chairman had decided to refer the movie to a revising committee on the basis of a complaint received by him regarding some visuals related to religious conflicts and references to the Indian Army.
8. It came to light, only after the filing of the writ petition, that the complainant was none other than a member of the examining committee who had listed out as many as 10 visuals related to religious conflicts in Form VIII, after watching the preview on December 19, and all those visuals pointed out by him had been removed from the movie by the producer. In so far as his complaint regarding the absence of an expert on Armed Forces in the examining committee was concerned, he had not made any such remark in the Form VIII after watching the movie. Such a complaint was made for the first time only in the letter written by him to the chairman after leaving the preview theatre.
9. The December 22, 2025 communication sent by the CBFC to the production house read: "The Board has come to the conclusion that the film is suitable for Unrestricted Public Exhibition with an endorsement of caution that the question as to whether any child below the age of 16 years may be allowed to see the film should be considered by the parents or guardian of such child, provided you carry out the excisions/ modifications in the film listed in the Annexure." Since the communication had used the words "The Board has come to the conclusion..." the chairman cannot thereafter turn a volte face and refer the movie to the revising committee.
10. Finally, even the suo motu power conferred on the chairman, under the 2024 Rules, to refer a movie to the revising committee will become otiose after the December 22, 2025 communication sent to the producer.
P.S. All these points will help the producer only if the Division Bench goes into the merits of the case and not if it decides to remit the matter to the single judge on the preliminary ground that the writ petition ought not to have been allowed without granting an opportunity to the CBFC to file a counter affidavit. Fingers crossed.
Breaking: #MadrasHighCourt Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice G. Arul Murugan will be delivering their judgement on January 27th on a writ appeal filed by Central Board of Film Certification against Justice PT Asha's order.
#JanaNayagan#Jananayagancensor