The Delhi High Court is hearing IRS officer Sameer Wankhede’s plea seeking removal of allegedly defamatory scenes from the Netflix series ‘Bads of Bollywood’. The show, produced by Red Chillies Entertainment, is claimed to harm his reputation and professional standing.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court is currently hearing a defamation case filed by IRS officer Sameer Dnyandev Wankhede against Red Chillies Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. and other parties, including Netflix, over certain scenes shown in the web series ‘Bads of Bollywood’, which is linked to the Aryan Khan case narrative.
The matter is being heard in CS(OS)-698/2025 before Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav. Wankhede has sought removal of specific scenes that he claims are damaging to his image and professional reputation.
During the hearing, Senior Advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul appeared on behalf of Red Chillies Entertainment and strongly defended the series, stating that the content shown is purely satirical and fictional in nature.
He clarified that the disputed portion is only a brief scene and does not directly target Wankhede as an individual.
He argued that the scene in question is part of creative storytelling and must be seen in its overall context, not in isolation.
Kaul submitted,
“The contested clip is a 1 minute 16-second scene where an overenthusiastic officer is pointed out to a character named Vastav Srivastava. It’s dark satire, a parody of issues in the film industry. Courts have held it must be judged from a reasonable viewer’s perspective. Satire and fiction can exist together there’s no legal bar. Stories may draw partial inspiration from real events, but disclaimers address that. Where is the malice? The show highlights industry challenges at a party setting.”
He further stated that the series covers multiple storylines and is not based solely on the Cordelia cruise case involving Aryan Khan. According to him, the character shown is a general representation of an overzealous officer and not a direct reference to Wankhede.
He also pointed out that Netflix used information that was already in the public domain, including interviews and details of ongoing inquiries.
Kaul added,
“We can’t rely on isolated lines. The series deals with around 20 themes. It is not a retelling of the Cordelia cruise case. The character reflects the idea of an overzealous officer not Wankhede. The plaint stresses on an unblemished career, but Netflix relied on publicly available material interviews and enquiry details. ED has filed a corruption case as well.”
Continuing his arguments, Kaul stressed that filmmakers have the creative freedom to address and critique issues within the Bollywood industry and that parody is a recognised form of expression.
He submitted that public officials must accept a certain level of criticism and cannot claim defamation merely because they feel offended or assume the portrayal refers to them.
He told the court,
“A filmmaker pointing out issues in Bollywood is entitled to portray assertive officers he can’t be blamed for how viewers interpret it. Satire relies on humour and exaggeration; a single scene can’t be isolated. Parody is a legitimate form of commentary. Creators can depict flaws in the industry. Even if someone sees themselves in it, public officials cannot be so thin skinned.”
Kaul also argued that even if the portrayal is viewed as harsh or unfair, that alone does not make it illegal or defamatory. He said the scene is clearly exaggerated for dramatic effect and does not mock the officer personally or the national institutions.
ALSO READ: Brahmin Pe Mootoonga Remark| Surat Court Issues Notice To Anurag Kashyap, Seeks Response
He concluded,
“Even assuming the portrayal is unfair, it doesn’t create a legal claim. The scenes are intentionally exaggerated there’s no mockery of him or the national emblem. The reference is to officials with an inflated sense of authority.”
The Delhi High Court has decided to hear Netflix’s detailed submissions in the matter tomorrow, after which it will continue to examine whether the concerned scenes truly violate Sameer Wankhede’s legal and reputational rights or fall within the boundaries of artistic freedom and satire.
Case Title:
SAMEER DNYANDEV WANKHEDE V/s RED CHILLIES ENTERTAINMENTS PVT. LTD. AND ORS CS(OS)-698/2025
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Bads of Bollywood
