The Madras High Court on Tuesday permitted KVN Productions to withdraw its writ petition seeking a direction to the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) to grant a UA certificate to actor-politician Vijay’s Tamil film Jana Nayagan, after the producers decided to opt instead for the statutory review process before the Revising Committee.

KVN Productions submitted Jana Nayagan to the CBFC for certification on December 18. (@JanaNayaganVJ | Official X account)Justice PT Asha permitted KVN Productions to withdraw the plea.

The production company’s decision came after a division bench of Chief Justice MM Shrivastava and Justice Arul Murugan, on January 27 this year, set aside an earlier single judge order that had directed the CBFC to issue a UA16+ certificate to the film and ordered a fresh hearing of the matter.

Recording the producers’ decision, Justice Asha, who had directed the CBFC to issue the certification, closed the proceedings, clearing the way for the film to be examined by the Revising Committee constituted by the CBFC.

KVN Productions had approached the high court after the CBFC, in early January, referred Jana Nayagan to a Revising Committee just days before its planned January 9 Pongal release. The producers had argued that the certification process had reached its final stage after the Examining Committee, on December 22, recommended a UA16+ certificate subject to 14 cuts and modifications.

Also Read: Jana Nayagan producer intends to withdraw HC writ petition against CBFC; film to be sent to revising committee

The referral to the Revising Committee, the producers claimed, derailed a process that was nearing completion and jeopardised the film’s release. The CBFC, however, cited a complaint raising concerns over religious sentiments and the portrayal of the armed forces to justify the referral.

On January 27, the division bench led by the chief justice had accepted the CBFC’s contention that the Board did not receive adequate opportunity to place its response on record before Justice Asha passed the January 9 order directing certification.

The bench had noted at the time that the CBFC should, at the very least, have been granted sufficient time to file a counter-affidavit addressing the producers’ allegations that the CBFC chairperson acted without jurisdiction.

The CBFC had maintained that the Examining Committee’s recommendation did not amount to a final statutory decision under the Cinematograph (Certification) Rules and that the chairperson acted within his powers in ordering a further review after receiving a complaint.

The Board also argued that the producers could have directly challenged the January 5 communication referring the film to the Revising Committee but chose not to do so.

Senior advocate Satish Parasaran, the counsel for KVN Productions, had defended the producers’ position, stating that the Board had effectively accepted the Examining Committee’s recommendation and that only the issuance of the certificate remained.

However, following the division bench’s order setting aside the single judge’s decision, the producers informed the Court of their decision to withdraw the writ petition and participate in the Revising Committee proceedings.

According to KVN Productions, Jana Nayagan was submitted to the CBFC on December 18, 2025, and had already undergone certification scrutiny before the present dispute arose.

Ayesha Arvind is a Senior Assistant Editor, specialising in legal and judicial reportage. She tracks high courts and tribunals, bringing key legal developments and their broader impact to the forefront.Read More