Sun TV Moves Madras High Court Against 'A' Certificate For Rajinikanth-Starrer Coolie, Says More Violent Films Like KGF Given 'UA' Certificate

Justice TV Thamilselvi is likely to hear the matter on Monday (August 25).

Sun TV has submitted that its production house, Sun Pictures, being the producer of the movie, had applied for certification as per Rule 22 of the Cinematography (Certification) Rules 1983. After evaluation of the movie, the Examining Committee sent an email stating that the movie would be given an “A” certificate, provided certain cuts are made.

Though the network requested the Revising Committee as per Rule 25 of the Cinematograph Rules, the Revising Committee also granted an “A” certificate, stating that the movie portrayed extensive violence. It was further submitted that since the movie was scheduled to be released on August 14, the network received the censor certificate.

The network also argued that when compared to movies like KGF, Beast, and others, Coolie movie depicted less violence and was still given an 'A' certificate.

Since the appellant tribunal constituted under the Cinematograph Act had been abolished, the company justified the filing of the miscellaneous application, claiming there is no other remedy provided under law.

When the matter was taken up today, Senior Advocate J Ravindran, appearing for the film company, requested a lunch motion. Additional Solicitor General ARL Sundaresan, appearing for the board, argued that lunch motions were allowed only in cases of extreme urgency and questioned the urgency in the petition.

Sundaresan argued that the movie was certified almost two weeks ago and released on the 14th of August. It was also submitted that at the time of certifying the movie, the Board had informed the production company that a “U/A” certificate would be given, provided certain additional cuts were made to the movie. He further submitted that the moviemakers, at that time, had informed that they did not wish to make any more cuts to the movie and had accepted the “A” certificate.

He thus argued that the appeal must be heard as an appeal and the Board be given an opportunity to file its counter to the appeal. He submitted that a notice must be issued, following which the Board must be given time to file a counter to the appeal, and the case can be heard finally. Following this, the court issued notice and adjourned the case to Monday.

Case Title: Sun TV Networks Ltd v. Central Board of Film Certification

Case No: CMP 20583 of 2025 and CMA 133449/2025 (Filing No.)