Mumbai: The Bombay High Court on Monday set aside the Central Board of Film Certification’s (CBFC) revising committee order that had refused certification to the film ‘Ajey: The Untold Story of a Yogi’, which is based on the life of Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath.

A division bench of Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice Neela Gokhale, after reviewing the film themselves, concluded that no edits were required. “We have seen the movie in its context, and we don't see that anything needs to be re-edited. We have paused at every point you flagged. We have noted everything. We don't find anything objectionable,” the court observed.

The court on Thursday observed that the CBFC had taken a rigid approach in rejecting the film’s certification, stressing that a movie must be evaluated in its entirety under the guidelines. The judges said they chose to view the film themselves to fully consider the objections raised.

During the hearing, the court remarked that although an appeal under Section 5-C of the Cinematograph Act, 1952, is available to the petitioner, it does not bar the High Court from exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution.

The petition was filed by Smart Cinematics, represented by senior advocate Ravi Kadam along with advocates Satatya Anand and Nikhil Aradhe. The production company argued that the CBFC had failed to follow due process in refusing certification.

Earlier this month, the court had directed the CBFC to conduct a screening of the film in accordance with the Cinematograph Act and rules, and to communicate its decision to the petitioner by 6 August 2025.

Samrat Cinematics, the production house behind the film, welcomed the court’s decision. In a statement, the company said, “Today’s outcome reaffirms our faith in the judiciary. This film is the sincere creative effort of over 300 industry professionals, and we remain hopeful that it will be allowed to reach the audience it was made for.” 

The court also kept the petition pending, citing the CBFC’s earlier “erroneous approach” and conduct in rejecting the film without adhering to legal procedure, and has sought compliance from the certification body.