New Delhi, July 16, 2025 – The Supreme Court of India has deferred its hearing on the controversial film Udaipur Files: Kanhaiya Lal Tailor Murder until July 21, declining to lift the Delhi High Court’s interim stay on the film’s release. The decision, made on Wednesday, has left the film’s producers, led by Amit Jani of Jani Firefox Media Pvt. Ltd., in limbo as they await a verdict from a government-appointed panel tasked with reviewing objections to the film’s certification. This development has sparked heated discussions across the nation, with debates centering on freedom of expression, judicial fairness, and communal sensitivities.

Background of the Controversy

Udaipur Files is a Bollywood film based on the brutal murder of Kanhaiya Lal Teli, a tailor in Udaipur, Rajasthan, who was killed in June 2022 by Mohammad Riyaz and Mohammad Ghous. The assailants, who later released a video claiming the murder was in retaliation for Lal’s alleged social media post supporting former BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma, sparked nationwide outrage. The case, investigated by the National Investigation Agency (NIA), is currently under trial at a special NIA court in Jaipur, with the accused charged under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) and provisions of the Indian Penal Code.

The film, starring Vijay Raaz and directed by Bharat S. Srinet and Jayant Sinha, was set to release on July 11, 2025. However, it faced significant opposition from petitioners, including Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind, journalist Prashant Tondon, and Mohammed Javed, an accused in the murder case. These parties argued that the film’s release could prejudice the ongoing trial, promote communal disharmony, and target a specific community, potentially inciting tension.

Legal Battles in the High Court

On July 10, 2025, the Delhi High Court, in a significant move, stayed the release of Udaipur Files just a day before its scheduled premiere. The court, presided over by Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Anish Dayal, directed the petitioners to approach the Central Government within two days to seek a review of the film’s certification under the Cinematograph Act, 1952. The court ruled that the film’s release would remain on hold until the Centre decided on the pleas seeking a permanent ban, citing concerns about its potential to disrupt communal harmony and affect the accused’s right to a fair trial.

The petitioners, particularly Mohammed Javed, contended that the film presented a “one-sided picture” of the case, which could compromise the judicial process. Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind further argued that the film’s trailer and promotional campaign were communally divisive. In response, the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) informed the court that certain “offending portions” of the film had been removed, and the producers were directed to arrange a screening for both sides’ counsel to address concerns.

Producer Amit Jani, undeterred, announced his intent to challenge the High Court’s stay in the Supreme Court, asserting that the film was based on facts, had received CBFC clearance, and was a “voice for justice” for Kanhaiya Lal. “The public has the right to know the truth,” Jani stated, emphasizing that the film aimed to highlight the gruesome murder that shocked the nation.

Supreme Court’s Stance

The Supreme Court’s involvement in the case began earlier, on July 9, when it refused to urgently list a plea by Mohammed Javed seeking a stay on the film’s release. The bench, comprising Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Joymalya Bagchi, orally remarked, “Let the film be released,” but clarified that this was not a ruling on the stay itself, as the court had not reviewed the case file. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the petitioners, emphasized this distinction, noting that the Supreme Court had only rejected an urgent listing, not the plea itself.

On July 14, the Supreme Court agreed to hear a plea by the film’s producers challenging the Delhi High Court’s stay order. However, in its latest hearing on July 16, a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi postponed the matter to July 21, directing the Centre’s panel to make a decision “immediately without loss of time” after hearing all parties, including the accused in the murder case. The court observed that if the film were released and later found to be problematic, the accused could not be compensated for potential damage to their reputation, whereas the filmmakers could be compensated monetarily for a delayed release.

The Supreme Court’s decision to defer the hearing has been interpreted as a cautious approach, balancing the filmmakers’ right to free expression with the accused’s right to a fair trial and concerns about communal harmony. The court also instructed the government panel, scheduled to meet at 2:30 PM on July 16, to consider the accused’s perspective in its review of the film’s certification.

Public and Social Media Reactions

The Udaipur Files controversy has ignited intense discussions on social media platforms, particularly on X, where sentiments are polarized. Some users expressed frustration over the continued delay, viewing the stay as a suppression of truth and justice for Kanhaiya Lal. One post lamented, “Truth remains buried, justice still awaited,” while others criticized the judicial system for denying urgent relief to the filmmakers. Conversely, supporters of the stay argue that the film’s release could exacerbate communal tensions and prejudice the ongoing trial, aligning with the petitioners’ concerns.

The film’s supporters, including producer Amit Jani, have framed Udaipur Files as a call for justice, emphasizing its factual basis and CBFC approval. Critics, however, fear that its narrative could inflame communal sentiments, given the sensitive nature of the case involving Nupur Sharma’s controversial remarks and the subsequent murder.

What’s Next?

As the Supreme Court awaits the Centre’s decision, all eyes are on the government panel’s review, expected to conclude soon. The panel’s verdict will determine whether Udaipur Files can proceed with its release or face further restrictions. The filmmakers remain hopeful, with Jani asserting that the film is a tribute to Kanhaiya Lal’s memory and a reflection of public sentiment. Meanwhile, the petitioners continue to push for a permanent ban, citing potential harm to the judicial process and societal harmony.

The case underscores the delicate balance between artistic freedom, judicial fairness, and social responsibility in India’s polarized socio-political landscape. With the next hearing scheduled for July 21, 2025, the fate of Udaipur Files hangs in the balance, promising further debates on the role of cinema in addressing real-world tragedies.

Stay tuned to Bharat Tone for the latest updates on this unfolding story.