IRS officer Sameer Wankhede on Monday argued before the Delhi High Court that defence of satire is not absolute and that Shah Rukh Khan’s production house Red Chillies Entertainment has targeted a public servant in Aryan Khan-directed Ba***ds of Bollywood' [Sameer Dnyandev Wankhede Vs. Red Chillies Entertainments Pvt. Ltd. & Ors].
The submission was made before Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav during the hearing of Wankhede's suit seeking an injunction and takedown of scenes allegedly ridiculing him in the Netflix show.
"Producer is big giant. They have come after a public servant," Wankhede's counsel submitted before the Court.
In the year 2021, Wankhede, the Zonal Director of Narcotics Control Bureau, had arrested Aryan Khan son of Bollywood actor Shah Rukh Khan, under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act at a drug raid in Mumbai. He was later cleared of the charges.
In the defamation suit filed before the High Court, Wankhede has claimed that a scene in the Netflix series involves a man bearing his resemblance and the scene "targets and ridicules" him.
He has sought damages of ₹2 crore from the show's producer Red Chillies Entertainment - owned by actor Shah Rukh Khan and his wife Gauri Khan - and Netflix. Besides damages, Wankhede has sought takedown of the defamatory content and injunction to restrain the publication and dissemination of any further defamatory statements regarding him.
The Court had earlier issued summons to Red Chillies Entertainment, Netflix, Google, X Corp and Meta and sought their responses to a defamation suit.
In a written reponse, Red Chillies told the Court that Wankhede’s reputation was already subject of public ridicule and adverse commentary much before the release of web series 'Ba***ds of Bollywood'
It referred to the proceedings initiated by Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) against Wankhede on charges of criminal conspiracy and extortion under the Indian Penal Code and Prevention of Corruption Act. Red Chillies also argued that the series is in the nature of satire and parody, which is a protected form of expression and does not constitute defamation.
Senior Advocate J Sai Deepak, appearing for Wankhede, today argued that Wankhede has exemplary track record but was being subjected to ridicule due to the history between parties.
He said that there was an element of malice and vendetta behind Wankhede's portrayal in the web series, adding that retribution was the source of inspiration for the content.
"This is not some wayward officer. They say he anyway had a terrible reputation. The trouble began with Aryan Khan. Ever since this matter has been taken up, it has gotten spotlight and attention. It is being reported selectively," Deepak claimed.
Deepak then took the Court through scenes of the web series where he is allegedly portrayed. The senior counsel also requested the Court to watch the episode in his chamber, stating that he knows what happens in the times of live streaming. However, the Court played the clips in the courtroom.
Meanwhile, Deepak said any disclaimer for the episode was inconsequential.
"Disclaimer has lost its value. There are judgments to show who the content refers to. The disclaimer is of no consequence. The proof of pudding is how people consume it," he said.
After the Court went through the clips, it remarked,
"I don’t think they are acknowledging that this character is Sameer Wankhede."
However, Deepak said,
"We have placed on record enough literature to show there was innuendo, third party publications, spoof has been placed on record. This is vendetta passing off as fiction."
Deepak also argued that the makers of the web-series had taken "a sly approach" and were hiding behind a disclaimer.
"The defence of satire is not absolute. You have exposed my department and my family. You have taken potshots at me in my professional capacity," he added.
Deepak also argued that removal of the allegedly derogatory content would not disrupt the flow of the series.
The Court then asked the production house to answer whether under the artistic freedom, it could portray Wankhede in such manner.
"What is the procedure followed and what happens when, in this case the problem is that you are depicting me so you either frankly say it was Wankhede but under guise of artistic freedom you cannot depict," it said.
Senior Advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul for Red Chillies said that he will address the query. The matter will be heard next on November 17.