The Supreme Court delivered a significant blow to the Vijay-starrer 'Jana Nayagan' on Thursday, January 15, 2026. The court refused to entertain a plea from the film's producer. This plea challenged a stay order issued by a Division Bench of the Madras High Court regarding the movie's certification.
Court Declines Intervention
A bench comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Augustine George Masih decided against intervening in the matter. The justices noted that the Madras High Court's Division Bench is scheduled to hear the case on January 20. They saw no reason to step in before that date.
Release Date in Limbo
With the censor certification dispute ongoing, the release date for 'Jana Nayagan' remains completely uncertain. The film was originally slated for a January 9 release to coincide with the Pongal festive season. This project marks actor Vijay's final appearance on the silver screen before he fully transitions into politics.
Timeline of the Controversy
The censor controversy surrounding 'Jana Nayagan' has unfolded over several weeks. Here is a detailed look at the key events.
December 18: Initial Submission
On December 18, the film's makers submitted 'Jana Nayagan' to the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC). After an initial screening, the examining committee reportedly requested multiple cuts. The producers agreed to these requirements. They later stated before the Madras High Court that they made approximately 27 cuts.
December 22: Re-submission
The makers implemented the recommended changes and submitted a revised version of the film to the CBFC on December 22. According to the producers, the CBFC's regional office verbally indicated that the examining committee had recommended a U/A 16+ certificate. However, this verbal assurance did not materialize into an official certificate.
January 5: Referral to Revising Committee
On January 5, the CBFC Chairperson referred the film to a revising committee. The regional office directed the 'Jana Nayagan' team to approach the CBFC's Mumbai office. The board later informed the court that the production house received notification of this referral via email on January 5. The CBFC stated the referral stemmed from an internal complaint by a committee member. The complaint alleged the film hurt religious sentiments and contained an objectionable portrayal of the armed forces. The board denied any ulterior motive for the delay.
January 6: Petition Filed in Madras HC
With the release date fast approaching, the film's producers filed a petition in the Madras High Court on January 6. They sought the immediate issuance of the censor certificate. The producer argued that further delays could result in losses nearing Rs 500 crore due to pre-sold tickets.
January 7: Release Postponed
During a hearing on Wednesday, January 7, the CBFC reiterated that the film was referred for revision due to complaints about religious sentiments and the portrayal of armed forces. By that evening, the makers officially announced the postponement of 'Jana Nayagan'. In a statement, they expressed regret and cited circumstances beyond their control, promising to announce a new date soon.
January 9: Madras HC Directs Certification, Then Stays It
On Friday, January 9, a single judge of the Madras High Court directed the CBFC to grant a U/A certificate to 'Jana Nayagan'. Justice PT Asha, while pronouncing the order, stated the complainant's grievance appeared to be an afterthought. The court warned that entertaining such complaints could set a dangerous trend. However, within hours, a two-judge Division Bench of the same court stayed this single judge's order, putting the certification on hold again.
January 12: Appeal to Supreme Court
The film's producer filed an appeal in the Supreme Court on January 12. This appeal challenged the Division Bench's order that stayed the directive to issue the certificate.
What Happens Next?
The fate of 'Jana Nayagan' now rests with the Madras High Court's Division Bench. The next hearing is set for Tuesday, January 20. All stakeholders must wait until then for further clarity on the film's certification and eventual release.
Disclaimer: This report is based on legal proceedings as covered by third-party sources. The details represent allegations from involved parties and are not proven facts. The case remains ongoing, and no final verdict has been delivered.
