Delhi High Court Rejects Sameer Wankhede’s Defamation Plea Against Netflix Series

Digital Desk

Delhi High Court Rejects Sameer Wankhede’s Defamation Plea Against Netflix Series

The Delhi High Court on Thursday dismissed a defamation suit filed by Indian Revenue Service (IRS) officer Sameer Wankhede against Netflix and Shah Rukh Khan-owned Red Chillies Entertainment, holding that it lacked territorial jurisdiction to hear the matter. The court granted Wankhede liberty to approach a court with appropriate jurisdiction, most likely in Mumbai.

Wankhede had sought damages of ₹2 crore, alleging that a character depicted in the Netflix series The Ba**ds of Bollywood* harmed his reputation by portraying a police officer in a defamatory manner. The suit also sought the removal of specific scenes from the show’s first episode, which he claimed indirectly referred to him and the Aryan Khan cruise drugs case.

The single-judge bench agreed with the arguments advanced by Netflix and Red Chillies that the matter did not fall within the territorial jurisdiction of the Delhi High Court. The defendants submitted that Wankhede resides in Mumbai and that Red Chillies Entertainment is registered there, making Mumbai the appropriate forum for adjudication.

Wankhede’s counsel had argued that Delhi courts had jurisdiction as the alleged defamation had consequences in the national capital. The plea cited ongoing departmental proceedings based in Delhi, media coverage emanating from the capital, and promotional activities conducted by Netflix and Red Chillies in Delhi. However, the court was not persuaded and ruled in favour of the defendants on the jurisdictional issue.

According to submissions recorded by the court, the defendants maintained that the series is a work of fiction and satire. In its response, Red Chillies stated that the scene objected to was only 1 minute and 48 seconds long and merely portrayed a police officer as “overly enthusiastic,” without naming or identifying Wankhede. “There is nothing defamatory in it,” the company said, adding that the content was protected under the freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.

The production house further argued that artistic expression can only be curtailed under the reasonable restrictions specified in Article 19(2), and the impugned scene did not meet those thresholds.

Wankhede, who rose to national prominence in 2021 following the arrest of Aryan Khan in the high-profile cruise drugs case, contended that the portrayal damaged his professional standing, particularly as proceedings related to the matter are still pending before the Bombay High Court and a special NDPS court.

In his plea, Wankhede stated that the damages, if awarded, would be donated to the Tata Memorial Cancer Hospital. With the Delhi High Court’s order, the dispute now hinges on whether he chooses to refile the case before a competent court in Mumbai.

Related Posts

Advertisement

Latest News