Now You Will Dictate To Directors Which Name And Story To Use?: Kerala High Court Castigates CBFC For Its Objection To Movie Title 'Janaki v State Of Kerala'

The Bench of Justice N. Nagaresh asked the CBFC, "Now you will dictate to the Directors and artists, which name they should give, which story they should use!"

Questioning the CBFC, the Court further asked, "Why should they change the name? You give a reason. What is wrong with Janaki? That is the freedom of artists; you cannot interfere with it."

Earlier, the High Court had directed the CBFC to produce the show cause notice issued by it to the producers, while questioning the CBFC for its objection against the title.

The producers of the movie, Cosmos Entertainments, had approached the High Court, filing a Writ Petition, being aggrieved by the delay in granting it certification for the release of the movie.

The Court asked the producers at the outset, "Is there any procedural illegality in the order?"

Advocate Haris Beeran, appearing for the producers, submitted that the show cause notice states that an appeal can be filed before the Film Certification Appellate Tribunal (FCAT), which has been abolished. "This is the level of application of mind", he submitted.

The Court responded, "I can set aside the notice for that reason alone, but that will not help you".

Beeran submitted that the name Janaki cannot be considered provocative, vulgar or offensive as per the guidelines. He also submitted that the teaser of the movie with the same title has been allowed. "The title has been approved three months back, by the same process", he submitted.

The Court asked the Counsel for the CBFC, "You tell me why the name should be changed".

The CBFC relied upon a guideline which says, "Visuals or words contemptuous of racial, religious or other groups are not presented".

The Court remarked, "That reason is prima facie unsustainable. Is Janaki a word contemptuous of racial, religious or other groups? In India, most of the names are attributed to god, whether it is Hindus, Muslims or Christians.... Muhammed, Antony, Ram, Krishna, eighty per cent of names have religious connotations".

The Counsel for CBFC submitted that neutral names ought to have been used.

"Neutral names? Now you will dictate to the directors and artists, which name they should give, which story they should use!", the Court observed.

The Court further asked, "Why should they change the name? You give a reason. What is wrong with Janaki? That is the freedom of artists; you cannot interfere with it."

The CBFC then submitted that the freedom of artists is not absolute.

The Court responded, "It is not absolute, but you dont have a convincing reason how the title violates the guideline".

Beeran then submitted that in 2023, a movie named Janaki Jane, a Malayalam film, was certified.

The Court asked CBFC, "Are you saying that the character in that movie is not fit to have the name Janaki?"

Beeran submitted, "Lordship may watch the movie. Your lordship has done it in the past".

The Court asked on a lighter note, "Why should I waste two and a half hours?"

"The delay is hurting us", Beeran submitted.

The Court asked, "What is the nature of character Janaki in the film?"

Beeran answered, "She is a rape victim, who strugles in Court and gets a favourable order. She is an epitome."

"She is not the rapist? If a rapist is named Rama, Krishna etc. I can understand. Here she is a survivor, fighting for justice. She is the heroine", the Court remarked.

Beeran submitted, "The delay is hurting me".

The Court then adjourned the matter to Wednesday. "You should give me a clear reason why the name Janaki should not be used. If you want to put it in black and white, do it", the Court told the Counsel for the CBFC.

Cause Title: M/s. Cosmos Entertainments v. The Regional Officer (WP(C) 23326/ 2025)