CHENNAI: Within hours after a single judge ordered the CBFC to immediately grant a censor certificate to actor-turned-politician Vijay's film, ‘Jana Nayagan’, the division bench of the Madras High Court stayed the order, leaving the fate of the film, which has drawn attention for its political overtones, in limbo. It stands unclear whether or not Vijay’s last movie could hit the screens well in time for Pongal next week.

Justice PT Asha had in the morning directed the Central Board of Film Certification to give clearance to ‘Jana Nayagan’, setting aside the film board's directive to refer the matter to a review committee. However, in the afternoon, the division bench, comprising Chief Justice MM Shrivastava and Justice G Arul Murugan, granted the stay while hearing an appeal filed by the CBFC.

Representing the board, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued that the single judge passed the directive without granting the CBFC time to file a formal counter-affidavit. It was further contended that the judge had quashed the CBFC chairperson's order referring the film to a Review Committee, even though the film's producers, KVN Productions, had not specifically challenged that referral in their petition.

Noting these submissions, the division bench issued the interim stay on the order that mandated forthwith certification. The bench also directed the production company to file a counter-affidavit and adjourned the hearing to January 20.

Allowing the petition filed by KVN Productions, seeking a direction to the CBFC to issue a censor certificate, Justice Asha, in her detailed order, had strongly criticised the CBFC's actions. She noted that the board had agreed to grant a 'U/A' certificate on December 22, the last day of the then chairperson's tenure. The court held that the chairperson’s authority for a suo motu referral to a committee ends once a decision is made to certify.

Calling a subsequent complaint from a committee member an "afterthought," Justice Asha said that once the board had decided to grant the certificate, the chairperson had no power to send the matter to the Review Committee. The film board immediately preferred an appeal against the order.

Additional Solicitor General ARL Sundaresan and Solicitor General Mehta argued that the chairperson had to review the decision to grant the certificate and send the matter to the review panel on the grounds of references to the Army and sentiments related to religion.