Jana Nayagan leak row: Producer opposes anticipatory bail for freelance editor in MHC

CHENNAI: The Madras High Court on Tuesday heard the anticipatory bail plea of a freelance editor accused in the alleged online leak of actor Vijay’s Jana Nayagan, with the film’s producer KVN Productions strongly opposing relief, claiming he was a prime accused involved in copying and circulating the movie even before its official release.

Jana Nayagan was scheduled for release on January 9 and is presently under review by the Revising Committee of the Central Board of Film Certification. But, it was leaked online on April 3.

Based on a complaint filed by KVN Productions, the Ashok Nagar police have registered a case for offences punishable under various provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Information Technology Act, 2000, and Copyright Act, 1957, and are conducting an investigation. In connection with the said case, a freelance editor, D Uma Shankar, a resident of Tiruverkadu, Tiruvallur, has filed a petition before the HC seeking anticipatory bail.

In his petition, he stated that he was a cardiac patient who had recently undergone heart surgery, he did not know anyone in the cinema industry and had no connection whatsoever with the offence. He stated that he has neither watched the film nor shared it with anyone. It was also submitted that the petitioner was ready and willing to cooperate with the enquiry.

However, he claimed that the Ashok Nagar police were repeatedly harassing him and his entire family. Shankar accused the police of falsely implicating him in this case to shield the actual accused. He also stated that he was, in fact, a victim in this case and that he was ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by the High Court.

When the case came up before Justice C Kumarappan, counsel Vijayan Subramanian, appearing for KVN Productions (producer of the movie), strongly objected to the anticipatory bail arguing that the petitioner was one of the prime accused in the case, who had copied the movie onto a hard disk and was involved in its circulation even before it was officially released.

Vijayan also informed the court that the police had already arrested eight persons in the case, of whom two were the petitioner’s brothers. Thus, he opposed bail and sought permission to file an intervening petition.

The court allowed the request, directing the production company to file an intervening petition, and adjourned the case to April 30.