‘CBFC has outlived its purpose’: RGV slams India’s censor board over Jana Nayagan

Kochi: With the legal battle over the release of ‘Jana Nayagan’ ongoing, veteran filmmaker Ram Gopal Varma has weighed in on the larger issue of film censorship in India. Known for his outspoken views, Varma described the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) as “outdated” and argued that censorship in today’s digital era is pointless and counterproductive.

Varma noted that in a world where even young children can access unfiltered content online—from violent footage to explicit material—attempts to control what people see in cinema are ineffective. “All of it is available instantly, anonymously, and without a gatekeeper,” he said, highlighting the vast reach of social media compared to films.

He criticised the CBFC for regulating movies based on personal tastes and biases, adding that age classification and content warnings make sense, but censorship does not. “The world has already moved on to so many platforms which are unfiltered and unsupervised… censorship doesn’t prevent exposure; it only insults the viewers,” he wrote on X (formerly Twitter).

Varma further emphasised that cinema’s role is to entertain and reflect society, not to serve as a classroom or moral guide. He condemned the hypocrisy of a society that freely consumes graphic content online but reacts strongly to similar depictions in theatres.

The comments come as the Madras High Court gave a temporary green signal to the film, directing the CBFC to grant a U/A certificate. However, a division bench later stayed the order, pushing the next hearing to January 21, affecting plans to release the film during the Pongal holidays.

Varma concluded by urging the film industry to collectively challenge the outdated system rather than debating censorship on a case-by-case basis, calling for a broader re-evaluation of the CBFC’s relevance in the digital age.

Ram Gopal Varma said that the CBFC was created in an era of limited media access and state-controlled information, when censorship had a meaningful purpose. Today, with unrestricted access to films, news, and social media, he argued, cutting words, blurring visuals, or trimming scenes cannot shield audiences.

“Censorship assumes people are children forever,” he wrote. “Age classification makes sense. Warnings make sense. Censorship does not.” He added that authorities applying their personal views as public morality violates freedom of expression guaranteed under the Constitution.

Varma also criticised the film industry for allowing the CBFC to persist without questioning its relevance. He said the focus should be on reforming the system itself rather than fighting over individual films.

The ongoing legal wrangle over ‘Jana Nayagan’ illustrates the tension between filmmakers, statutory boards, and the public’s right to view content freely, highlighting broader debates over artistic freedom and censorship in modern India.