Udaipur Files: A Film’s Journey from CBFC Approval to Court Stay

The movie Udaipur Files was supposed to release in cinemas on July 11. But on July 10, the Delhi High Court stopped its release. This ban will continue until the Central Government decides on a request made by the group Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind. They want the government to review the movie’s certificate given by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC).

This movie is related to a case that was investigated by the NIA (National Investigation Agency). The people accused in the case were charged under serious anti-terror laws (UAPA) and sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The trial for this case is still going on in a special NIA court in Jaipur.

One of the accused, Mohammed Javed, went to the Supreme Court. He requested that the movie should not be released until the trial is finished.

The movie ‘Udaipur Files’ is based on the murder of tailor Kanhaiya Lal, which happened in Udaipur, Rajasthan, in June 2022. He was allegedly killed by Mohammad Riyaz and Mohammad Ghous. After the murder, the attackers posted a video saying they did it because Kanhaiya Lal had shared a social media post in support of former BJP leader Nupur Sharma, who had made controversial comments about Prophet Mohammed.

The Delhi High Court, through a bench of Chief Justice D. K. Upadhyaya and Justice Anish Dayal, told the person who wanted to stop the film (Madani) to first approach the Central Government. He was asked to request the government to review the decision of the Censor Board (CBFC), which had already allowed the film to release.

High Court Decided

Until the Centre decides on whether to give temporary relief (like stopping the film’s screening), the High Court put a temporary stay on the release of the film. This stay will last from July 14 to July 21 at most, depending on when the Centre decides.

The CBFC told the court that they had already asked the filmmakers to make 55 cuts to the movie, and those changes were made. The Central Government also said that the movie is about a specific crime, not about any particular religious community.

Response of High Court Stay

Senior Advocate Gaurav Bhatia, representing the producers of the film Udaipur Files, went to the Supreme Court asking for an urgent hearing. He was challenging a Delhi High Court order that stopped the movie’s release just one day before it was supposed to hit theatres on July 11.

Bhatia told the court that the film had already been approved by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), tickets had been sold in advance, and theatres were fully booked. He also pointed out that earlier, the Supreme Court had refused to urgently hear a request from one of the accused in the case who wanted to stop the movie from releasing. So, according to him, it was unfair that the Delhi High Court stepped in at the last minute and blocked the release, despite everything being ready. He argued that this sudden stay was a violation of the filmmakers’ fundamental rights.

Supreme Court

The bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi held in this case. Senior advocate Gaurav Bhatia asked the Supreme Court for an urgent hearing on a request made by ‘Jani Firefox Media’, a film producer from Meerut. The producer is challenging the Delhi High Court’s July 10 order that stopped the release of their movie, even though the Censor Board (CBFC) had allowed it with some cuts.

Bhatia said the High Court gave this order based on a petition by Maulana Arshad Madani, who claimed the film wrongly targets the entire Muslim community. But Bhatia argued that the film is based on a real incident — the beheading of Kanhaiya Lal in June 2022 by two Muslim men, and that the filmmakers had already made the changes suggested by the CBFC.

The High Court did not reject Madani’s petition completely, but told him he could appeal to the Central Government under Section 6 of the Cinematograph Act. It also said that until the government decides on Madani’s request, the movie cannot be released.

Senior Advocate Gaurav Bhatia, who represented the filmmakers, told the court that the producer, director, and even Kanhaiya Lal’s son are getting death threats.

The court took this matter seriously and said they can immediately contact the local police officials like the Superintendent or Commissioner of Police. The police must check if the threat is real, and if it is, they should take proper steps to protect them.

Bhatia also told the court that he is challenging the Delhi High Court’s order because the film already has a valid certificate from the Censor Board, which is a legal authority.

Advocate Gaurav Bhatia asked the court to hear the matter quickly. He argued that the High Court’s order was wrong, because once the Censor Board (CBFC) approves a film, it is considered legal. However, Bhatia also said, “That approval by CBFC shouldn’t stop me from using my right to free speech under Article 19 of the Constitution.”

At the beginning of the hearing on Wednesday, the judges asked about the status of the revision hearing on the film. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing those who went to the High Court against the movie, said that the hearing is scheduled for 2:30 PM.

Senior Advocate Menaka Guruswamy, who spoke for Mohammed Javed, said the movie shows two issues that are still being decided in court — the Gyanvapi dispute and the Kanhaiya Lal murder case. She also said, “The film shows the judiciary in a bad light. It is full of hatred and could damage people’s trust in the courts. There is a lot at risk here. The filmmakers can’t use free speech as an excuse to harm someone’s right to a fair trial or to disrespect the judiciary.”

Judges Statement

Justice Surya Kant said that since the Central Government is already hearing the matter today, the court should wait for their opinion before deciding.

He said, “What if the Centre suggests more cuts in the film? There could be arguments on both sides. If the Centre wasn’t taking up the case, we might have acted. But since the government is looking into it, let’s wait a day or two. Everyone involved can present their side to the government. We will keep your petitions pending for now.”

He also said, “The same law that gave your film a certificate is now allowing a review of that decision. So let’s wait and see what the government decides.”

The judge added, “If later it turns out you were right, and you prove that you faced losses because of this case, we will look into how you can be compensated.”

Justice Kant also agreed with Bhatia’s point of Art 19 and said, “You’re right. Our judges are not like schoolchildren who can be misled by a movie or its dialogues. Judges have a strong sense of fairness and don’t get influenced easily. We believe in that. But at the same time, if someone feels concerned, they also have the right to be heard.”

Union Government

As on 22 July,2025 , The Union government has granted conditional clearance for the release of Udaipur Files, a controversial film based on the 2022 murder of tailor Kanhaiya Lal in Rajasthan, while directing six additional modifications amid mounting concerns that the film could incite communal disharmony and vilify the Muslim community.

These 6 cuts are:

1. Replace the existing disclaimer with the recommended one and include a voice-over for the disclaimer.

2. Remove frames in the credits that thank various individuals.

3. Revise the AI-generated scene depicting a Saudi Arabia-style turban.

4. Replace all instances of the name ‘Nutan Sharma’, including on the poster, with a new name.

5. Delete Nutan Sharma’s dialogue: “…maine toh wohi kaha hai jo unke dharm grantho mein likha hai…”

6. Remove following dialogues: Hafiz: “…Baluchi kabhi wafadar nahin hota…”; Makbool: “…Baluchi ki…” and “…Arre kya Baluchi kya Afghani kya Hindustani kya Pakistani…”

The court told the filmmakers that the Centre’s clearance for the film will stay valid unless it's challenged and overturned. Senior lawyers Kapil Sibal and Menaka Guruswamy opposed the film's release. The government said it had reviewed the case, but the court's temporary stay will continue for now. Objections can be raised in the next hearing.

Recent Updates

As on 24 July,  2025, the Supreme Court said  that society has the right to decide whether to watch a movie or not, and linking every creative work to a person or issue will only create unnecessary problems.The Supreme Court is also seized of a petition by Mohammed Javed, one of the accused in the tailor Kanhaiya Lal murder case, on which the film is based.

The Supreme Court on 25 July told the petitioners to first approach the High Court since the Centre has already allowed the movie release with some changes. The bench noted that the producer is satisfied with the Centre’s decision and no longer wants to pursue the case in the Supreme Court.“Go to the High Court first. Why waste our time?” the judges said. The Court added that it has not given any opinion on the case's merits and the High Court is free to decide as it sees fit.

The producers of the film "Udaipur Files — Kanhaiya Lal Tailor Murder" informed the Delhi High Court on Monday (July 28, 2025) that it had applied to the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) for a re-certification of the movie which was likely to be considered soon.

Noting the submission that the film’s re-certification was pending, the court posted the hearing for July 30, Wednesday.

Verdicto will continue to follow this story closely, bringing you legal insights, expert interviews, and fact-based analysis.

Stay tuned. Because where law meets journalism — truth must prevail.

📌 Follow us on YouTube, Instagram, and Twitter for more updates.