The film is in controversy because the Kerala Police registered a case against its makers and distributors. This follows a complaint that the version playing in cinemas violates censor board rules.
CBFC Files Case Against Mollywood Times Makers Over Alleged Uncensored Theatre Version
Mollywood Times has landed in legal trouble after Kerala Police registered a case following a CBFC complaint. Authorities allege theatres screened an unauthorised version.

- Kerala Police registered case against
- CBFC complained film version differed from approved certified release.
- Restored scenes and uncensored dialogues reportedly violated censor rules.
- Police launched investigation under Cinematograph Act, summoning parties.
Naslen-starrer Mollywood Times has landed in controversy after the Kerala Police registered a case against the film’s makers and distributors over alleged violations of the censor board rules. The action follows a complaint filed by the regional office of the Central Board of Film Certification, which claims the version currently playing in cinemas differs from the one officially cleared for release. According to the complaint, scenes that were ordered to be removed have allegedly been restored, while muted dialogues containing objectionable language were reportedly left uncensored. The matter has now triggered a formal investigation, putting the film’s team under legal scrutiny in Kerala.
CBFC Complaint
The controversy began after the Central Board of Film Certification raised concerns about the version of Mollywood Times being screened in theatres. As per the complaint, the film had received a U/A 16+ certificate only after the makers agreed to remove certain scenes and mute specific dialogues containing objectionable language. However, authorities now claim theatres may have screened a different version altogether. The allegation suggests that deleted scenes were restored and censored dialogues were presented without the approved cuts.
Following the complaint, Kerala Police registered a case under Section 7(1)(a)(ii) of the Cinematograph Act. The law deals strictly with certification violations, including screening an uncertified version of a film or making changes after approval. Conviction under this section can lead to imprisonment of up to three years, along with a fine of Rs 1 lakh. The FIR reportedly names the producer, director, distributor, digital service providers and theatre owners linked to the release.
ALSO READ | Sunil Grover Goes Viral For Sleeping At Triveni Ghat, Fans Call Him Down To Earth
Police Likely To Summon Those Named
Authorities are expected to begin questioning all parties named in the FIR soon. Investigators will examine whether the version screened in cinemas was altered after certification or whether an entirely unauthorised print was circulated to theatres. The case is expected to draw significant attention within the Malayalam film industry.
ALSO READ | 'Shekhar Suman Remembers Late Son Aayush, Says ‘He Will Be Reborn As My Grandson’
About the film
Mollywood Times is directed by Abhinav Sunder Nayak and stars Naslen in the lead role. The film follows Vineeth Madhavan, a teenager from Kuttikkanam who dreams of becoming a filmmaker. Positioned as a sharp satire on the industry, the movie explores ambition, struggle and the realities of cinema through a darkly comic lens. The cast also includes Sangeeth Prathap and Sharaf U Dheen, with music by Jakes Bejoy.
Release Details
Backed by Ashiq Usman Productions and Namesake, the film was released in theatres on 5 June 2026 after being delayed from its original release schedule. Despite its unique premise and strong buzz, the film is now facing legal hurdles that may overshadow its theatrical run. As the investigation moves forward, all eyes will be on the filmmakers’ response and the findings of the Kerala Police. The outcome could have serious legal and industry-wide implications.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why is
What are the specific allegations against the film's theatrical release?
The complaint alleges restored deleted scenes and uncensored muted dialogues in the theatrical version. This contradicts the officially cleared version approved by the CBFC.
Who filed the complaint against
The regional office of the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) filed the complaint. They claim the film was screened with content that was supposed to be removed or muted.
What are the potential penalties for violating censor rules?
Conviction under Section 7(1)(a)(ii) of the Cinematograph Act can lead to imprisonment of up to three years. Additionally, a fine of Rs 1 lakh may be imposed.
Who is named in the First Information Report (FIR)?
The FIR names the producer, director, distributor, digital service providers, and theatre owners. Police are expected to summon these parties for questioning regarding the alleged violations.


























