HomeOther LawsDelhi High Court Allows Sameer Wankhede to Pursue Defamation Case in Mumbai...

Delhi High Court Allows Sameer Wankhede to Pursue Defamation Case in Mumbai Over Netflix Series

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday permitted former Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) officer Sameer Wankhede to approach a Mumbai court to pursue his defamation suit concerning the Netflix series Ba**ds of Bollywood*. The order was passed by Justice Vikas Mahajan, who allowed Wankhede’s application and directed the parties to appear before the City Civil and Sessions Court at Dindoshi, Malad, on February 12, when Wankhede proposes to file the plaint.

The application was moved under Order VII Rule 10A of the Civil Procedure Code, which empowers a court returning a plaint for lack of jurisdiction to fix a date for the parties’ appearance before the appropriate court where the suit is to be instituted.

Earlier, the Delhi High Court had declined to entertain Wankhede’s defamation suit on jurisdictional grounds. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav had held that the Delhi High Court was not the proper forum, noting that the principal defendants—Red Chillies Entertainment—are based in Mumbai, the plaintiff himself resides in Mumbai, and the alleged cause of action also arose there. The Court observed that the “Merger Rule of Tejpal” applied squarely to the facts of the case and concluded that only courts in Mumbai had the jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute. Consequently, the plaint was returned to Wankhede with liberty to present it before a court of competent jurisdiction.

Wankhede’s defamation claim stems from a scene in the Netflix series Ba**ds of Bollywood*, which he alleges depicts a character closely resembling him in a derogatory and mocking manner. In his suit, Wankhede has sought damages of ₹2 crore from the show’s producer, Red Chillies Entertainment—owned by actor Shah Rukh Khan and Gauri Khan—as well as from Netflix. He has also sought directions for the removal of the allegedly defamatory content and an injunction restraining the publication or circulation of any further statements that he claims harm his reputation.

The controversy has its roots in events from 2021, when Wankhede, then serving as the Zonal Director of the NCB, led a drug raid in Mumbai that resulted in the arrest of Aryan Khan, son of Shah Rukh Khan, under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. Aryan Khan was subsequently cleared of the charges.

During the pendency of the matter, the High Court had earlier issued summons to Red Chillies Entertainment, Netflix, Google, X Corp, and Meta, seeking their responses to Wankhede’s allegations.

In its written submission, Red Chillies Entertainment opposed the defamation claim, contending that Wankhede’s public image had already been the subject of criticism and negative commentary well before the release of the Netflix series. The production house pointed to proceedings initiated by the Central Bureau of Investigation against Wankhede, which include allegations of criminal conspiracy and extortion under the Indian Penal Code and the Prevention of Corruption Act. Red Chillies further argued that the series qualifies as satire and parody, forms of expression protected under law, and therefore does not amount to defamation.

With the Delhi High Court having clarified the issue of jurisdiction, the dispute is now set to be taken up by the Mumbai court, which will examine the merits of Wankhede’s defamation claims against the streaming platform and the production house.

Case Details

Case Title: Sameer Dnyandev Wankhede Versus Red Chillies Entertainments Pvt. Ltd.

Case No.: CS (OS) 698/2025, I.A. No. 24508/2025, I.A. No. 24510/2025 & I.A. No. 28922/2025

Date: 29/01/2026

Counsel For  Petitioner:  J. Sai Deepak, Sr. Advocate 

Counsel For Respondent: Angad Makkar

Read More: No Excise Duty Payable on Export Goods Damaged in Transit Before Shipment: CESTAT 

Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : MARCH 18, 2026

Here’s the Tax Law Daily Bulletin for March 18, 2026.GSTCONSOLIDATION OF SCNS COVERING MULTIPLE...

Mumbai Customs Busts Rs. 64.39 Crore Hydroponic Weed Racket at Airport; 4 Passengers Arrested Under NDPS Act

In a major anti-narcotics operation, officers of the Airport Commissionerate under Mumbai Customs Zone–III...

Attachment of Bank Accounts Despite ITAT Stay Illegal: Delhi HC Quashes Coercive Recovery

The Delhi High Court has set aside the attachment of bank accounts holding that...

No GST Recovery Without Following Law: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court directed the immediate restoration of GST registration of the assessee...

More like this

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : MARCH 18, 2026

Here’s the Tax Law Daily Bulletin for March 18, 2026.GSTCONSOLIDATION OF SCNS COVERING MULTIPLE...

Mumbai Customs Busts Rs. 64.39 Crore Hydroponic Weed Racket at Airport; 4 Passengers Arrested Under NDPS Act

In a major anti-narcotics operation, officers of the Airport Commissionerate under Mumbai Customs Zone–III...

Attachment of Bank Accounts Despite ITAT Stay Illegal: Delhi HC Quashes Coercive Recovery

The Delhi High Court has set aside the attachment of bank accounts holding that...