Madras HC sends Jana Nayagan-CBFC case back to single judge
The Madras High Court has made a significant decision in the ongoing case between the makers of Thalapathy Vijay’s upcoming film, Jana Nayagan, and the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC). In a recent development, the division bench of the court has set aside a single judge’s order directing the CBFC to grant a U/A 16+ certificate to the film. Instead, the matter has been sent back to the single judge for fresh consideration, allowing the makers to amend their plea and challenge the CBFC chairperson’s order.
This decision comes as a significant blow to the film’s makers, who were hoping to obtain a favorable certification from the CBFC. The CBFC had earlier refused to grant a U/A 16+ certificate to the film, citing certain objections. The makers had then approached the Madras High Court, seeking relief and challenging the CBFC’s decision.
The single judge’s order, which was passed earlier, had directed the CBFC to grant a U/A 16+ certificate to the film. However, the CBFC had appealed against this order, arguing that the single judge had exceeded its jurisdiction. The division bench, while hearing the appeal, has now set aside the single judge’s order and sent the matter back for fresh consideration.
The division bench has asked the single judge to hear the case expeditiously, allowing the makers to amend their plea and challenge the CBFC chairperson’s order. This means that the makers will have to re-file their petition, incorporating the necessary amendments, and the single judge will have to hear the case afresh.
The CBFC had earlier objected to certain scenes and dialogues in the film, which it deemed objectionable. The makers had argued that the film was a work of fiction and that the scenes and dialogues in question were necessary for the plot. However, the CBFC had refused to budge, leading to the makers approaching the court.
The Madras High Court’s decision to send the matter back to the single judge is significant, as it highlights the importance of following the proper procedure in such cases. The court has made it clear that the single judge’s order was premature and that the makers need to follow the proper procedure to challenge the CBFC’s decision.
The film’s makers will now have to re-file their petition and argue their case afresh before the single judge. The single judge will then have to hear the case and pass a fresh order, taking into account the CBFC’s objections and the makers’ arguments.
This development is a significant setback for the film’s makers, who were hoping to release the film soon. The delay in obtaining a favorable certification from the CBFC will likely push back the film’s release date, causing losses to the producers and distributors.
The case highlights the ongoing struggle between film makers and the CBFC, which has been a contentious issue in the Indian film industry for many years. The CBFC’s role is to certify films for public exhibition, but its decisions are often challenged by film makers, who argue that the board’s guidelines are too restrictive.
In recent years, there have been several instances of film makers challenging the CBFC’s decisions in court. The courts have often intervened, directing the CBFC to reconsider its decisions or granting relief to the film makers. However, the CBFC has also been successful in defending its decisions in several cases, highlighting the complexities and challenges involved in film certification.
The outcome of the Jana Nayagan case will be closely watched by the film industry, as it will have significant implications for film makers and the CBFC. The case highlights the need for a more nuanced and balanced approach to film certification, one that takes into account the creative freedom of film makers while also ensuring that films are suitable for public exhibition.
In conclusion, the Madras High Court’s decision to send the Jana Nayagan-CBFC case back to the single judge is a significant development that highlights the complexities and challenges involved in film certification. The case will be closely watched by the film industry, and its outcome will have significant implications for film makers and the CBFC.
About the Author
