Censorship controversy and CBFC objection
Before its release, the film was involved in a certification dispute with the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC). According to reports, the CBFC initially declined to certify the film, citing concerns over the use of the name Janaki for the lead character, which they reportedly considered sensitive due to its association with the Hindu goddess Sita. The filmmakers, however, stated that no formal written explanation was provided and that they were verbally asked to change both the character's name and the film's title. [34]
The reported objection drew responses from various film industry organizations and political groups. B. Unnikrishnan, General Secretary of the Film Employees Federation of Kerala (FEFKA), criticized the demand, describing it as unusual and expressing concern about its implications for creative expression. [35] The Democratic Youth Federation of India (DYFI) also issued a statement opposing the reported stance of the CBFC and called for respect for artistic freedom. [36] Several media commentators and legal professionals also questioned the absence of a documented rationale from the CBFC and raised broader concerns about freedom of expression in cinema.
Due to the dispute, the film's release, originally scheduled for 27 June 2025, was postponed. The filmmakers publicly stated that they did not intend to comply with the requested changes and were considering legal action against the CBFC's decision. [37]
The Kerala High Court intervened in the matter and sought clarification from the CBFC. During the proceedings, the Court questioned whether the Board had the authority to object to character names and storylines. The Court referenced previous films such as Seeta Aur Geeta and Ram Lakhan to highlight what it viewed as inconsistent application of guidelines. Justice N. Nagaresh directed the CBFC to submit a written affidavit explaining how the use of the name "Janaki" conflicted with certification rules. The affidavit was to be submitted by 2 July 2025, the date of the next scheduled hearing. [38]
On 30 June 2025, various Malayalam film industry organizations, including FEFKA, AMMA, and the Kerala Film Producers Association, held a protest at CBFC's regional office in Thiruvananthapuram. Participants symbolically discarded scissors into a bin and carried placards advocating for creative freedom and protesting against censorship. [39]
FEFKA's General Secretary B. Unnikrishnan reiterated concerns regarding alleged interference in naming decisions. [40] Director Kamal likened the situation to earlier instances of censorship in India's political history and emphasized the need to safeguard artistic liberties. [41] Kerala's Minister for Cultural Affairs, Saji Cherian, also commented on the issue, calling CBFC's reported objection "unacceptable" and raising concerns about its potential impact on smaller filmmakers. [42]
On 2 July 2025, the Kerala High Court directed that the film be screened for judicial review on 5 July 2025. The next hearing was scheduled for 9 July 2025. [43]
During the 9 July 2025 hearing, a settlement was reached between the film's producers and the CBFC. Initially, the CBFC had proposed 96 edits and changes to the film's title and character name. Following discussions facilitated by the Court, the CBFC agreed to reduce the required changes to two: muting the name "Janaki" in two courtroom scenes and modifying the film's title to reflect the protagonist's full name.
The original title Janaki v/s State of Kerala was revised to Janaki V v/s State of Kerala and it was adopted to represent the character's full name, Janaki Vidhyadharan. While the filmmakers initially expressed concern over the impact of these changes, they agreed to the modifications. The High Court directed the producers, Cosmos Entertainments, to submit the updated version of the film and instructed the CBFC to issue the certification within three days. [44]
