After the Supreme Court hearing in the Jana Nayagan certification dispute, the court declined to grant interim relief to the producers of Vijay’s film. Here is a detailed update of the SC proceedings for Jana Nayagan.
The makers of Thalapathy Vijay’s Tamil Jana Nayagan faced yet another setback after the Supreme Court refused to grant them interim relief. The SC referred the matter to the Madras High Court, directing it to pass an order on January 20.
The plea had challenged the move to grant the film an ‘A’ certificate. The order was passed by a bench comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice A G Masih.
During the hearing in the Supreme Court of India, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the producers of Jana Nayagan, opened arguments by explaining the situation the makers were placed in due to the stalled certification.
“My lords, this relates to a film. Now see the predicate in which I am placed. The industry practice is that you announce, and I have fixed 9th [for release] and I have got 5000 theatres in India. I get a certification saying you will get U/A certificate subject 10 cuts. That happened on 19 Dec,” Rohatgi told the court, stressing that the release plans were locked well in advance based on this assurance, as per a Live Law report.
Justice Dipankar Datta responded by remarking on the speed with which the matter moved through the High Court. “We would welcome all the judges who dispose off matters within a day or two of filing. This should have in all cases but this is a blistering pace!” he observed.
Justice Datta then pointed out that the single-judge order relied on a 2024 judgment that was not applicable in this case. “It has to be challenged, learned judge referred to 2024 judgment which is not applicable it is a service matter. Go back to division bench,” he said.
Rohatgi, reacting strongly, claimed serious prejudice to the producers. “I have lost everything, this is complete malafide,” he said, adding that delays could permanently damage the film’s prospects. “Publicity has already happened, after 3 months people will not wait,” he explained.
Explaining the timeline, Rohatgi told the court, “On 5, I filed writ and there was an email, I challenged that. On 6th, I challenged.”
Justice Datta responded by underlining procedural fairness. “That is the law, why shouldn’t the party be given an opportunity to reply? Take this point before division bench,” he said, indicating that the matter should be addressed at the High Court level.
In a final request, Rohatgi urged the Supreme Court to at least ensure an early decision. “At least tell the division bench to decide on Jan 20, I have lost everything,” he said.
After hearing both sides, the court passed a brief order: “Let the division bench decide on January 20.”
The Supreme Court thus declined to grant interim relief and directed that the issue be decided by the Madras High Court’s division bench on the scheduled date.
Also read: Jana Nayagan row LIVE Updates: SC refuses relief to makers, asks HC to decide on January 20
