The Delhi High Court has stepped into one of the most talked-about controversies of the year, summoning Shah Rukh Khan and Gauri Khan’s Red Chillies Entertainment, alongside streaming giant Netflix and social media platforms Google, X Corp, and Meta, over a defamation complaint filed by Indian Revenue Service officer Sameer Wankhede.
At the heart of the matter lies a contentious scene in The Ba**ds of Bollywood* — Aryan Khan’s debut web series — which Wankhede claims maligns his reputation and casts aspersions on the integrity of anti-drug enforcement agencies. His plea is not just about restoring personal honour; it raises a larger question about how art, satire, and public narrative intersect in the digital era.
Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav has directed the defendants to respond, stating firmly: “Let them take instructions and file a reply. Cannot pass an injunction order in general.” Wankhede’s complaint demands not only the removal of the disputed scene but also ₹2 crore in compensation — a sum he has pledged to donate to Tata Memorial Cancer Hospital.
The controversy is rooted in a real-life episode that gripped national headlines: Wankhede’s leadership of the Narcotics Control Bureau’s (NCB) high-profile 2021 cruise ship raid, which resulted in Aryan Khan’s arrest. Aryan was later cleared of all charges in 2022 after the NCB concluded no drugs were found. Now, the dispute extends beyond a single scene to larger questions of reputation, accountability, and artistic freedom.
Wankhede asserts that the series “disseminates a misleading and negative portrayal of anti-drug enforcement agencies, thereby eroding public confidence in law enforcement institutions.” He also takes strong issue with another scene showing a character making a middle-finger gesture while reciting Satyamev Jayate — part of the National Emblem — claiming it violates the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act of 1971.
The court, however, has pressed Wankhede on procedural grounds, questioning whether his case has sufficient cause of action originating in Delhi. Senior advocate Sandeep Sethi, representing Wankhede, argued that the series is available in various cities including Delhi and that the defamation occurred as a result. Justice Kaurav has asked Wankhede to amend his plea to clearly establish this link.
This case, now slated for hearing on October 30, sits at the complex intersection of freedom of expression, digital content regulation, and public accountability — themes that are becoming increasingly contentious in India’s rapidly evolving entertainment landscape. Whether the Delhi High Court’s decision will tilt in favour of artistic license or protection of reputation will have implications far beyond this single case, setting important precedents for creators, regulators, and audiences alike.
