Superstar Shah Rukh Khan’s production company, Red Chillies Entertainment, has strongly defended itself in the defamation case filed by IRS officer Sameer Wankhede over the web series The Bads of Bollywood, directed by Aryan Khan. The company argued before the Delhi High Court that the show, while inspired by the broader concept of overzealous law-enforcement officers, does not portray or reference the controversial Cordelia cruise drugs case in which Aryan Khan was implicated in 2021.
On Wednesday, Red Chillies Entertainment opposed Wankhede’s plea seeking an interim injunction on the streaming of the series. Appearing for the production house, senior advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul told Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav that the series is a fictional satire and should be viewed as such. He argued that the coexistence of satire, fiction, and inspiration from real-life personalities is not unlawful.
“Can satire and fiction co-exist? There is no law that they cannot. I may be partly inspired by real persons and stories, yet there can be disclaimers. Where is the ill will or malice?” Kaul said, emphasising that the show revolves around the world of Bollywood parties and success stories rather than specific real-life controversies.
Kaul further argued that Wankhede’s claims were exaggerated and based on selective interpretation. “Can you pick a stray instance, a passage here or there? The series is about 20 different issues. We do not show a documentary on the Cordelia cruise incident. I am inspired by overzealous officers. That is far from saying that this is the Cordelia cruise story,” he stated.
The Cordelia cruise case remains one of the most high-profile events of 2021. Aryan Khan was arrested by the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) after a raid on the Goa-bound Cordelia Empress cruise ship. The operation was led by then-NCB zonal director Sameer Wankhede. Aryan spent over three weeks in jail before being granted bail, and was later given a clean chit when no evidence of drug consumption or possession was found against him.
In court, Kaul also questioned Wankhede’s claims of reputational harm, alleging that the officer frequently engaged with the media and had openly discussed the issues highlighted in the series even after its release. He argued that such conduct undermines Wankhede’s claim of being defamed or targeted.
The case continues as the court examines whether the series warrants restriction or falls well within the protections accorded to creative expression.
