The Bombay High Court advised Salman Khan’s neighbour Ketan Kakkad to consider deleting social media posts and videos targeting the actor, observing that access to digital platforms does not confer a right to damage another person’s reputation. The Court stressed that pending disputes should be resolved through legal proceedings.
The Bombay High Court advised Ketan Kakkad, a Panvel-based landowner and neighbour of Bollywood actor Salman Khan, to consider removing social media content posted by him against the actor. The Court observed that the availability of social media platforms does not grant an unrestricted right to make allegations or publish material that could harm another person’s reputation.
Hearing the appeal filed by Salman Khan in an ongoing defamation dispute, Justice Sharmila Deshmukh questioned Kakkad’s decision to continue posting videos and comments online despite having already initiated legal proceedings concerning the property dispute. The Court remarked that disputes pending before judicial forums should ordinarily be resolved through legal processes rather than public campaigns on social media.
The Court observed that merely having access to digital platforms does not entitle an individual to upload videos or publish statements against another person, whether a private citizen or a celebrity, solely for the purpose of tarnishing their reputation. During the hearing, Justice Deshmukh suggested that Kakkad consider deleting the tweets, videos, and other online content containing allegations against Khan while the matter remains under judicial consideration.
Who is Ketan Kakkad?
Ketan Kakkad is a retired Non-Resident Indian (NRI) who spent a substantial part of his professional life in the United States before returning to India. In the mid-1990s, he purchased a portion of land situated on a hilltop in Panvel, Raigad district, adjoining Salman Khan’s sprawling farmhouse property popularly known as Arpita Farms.
According to Kakkad, when he was exploring opportunities to purchase land for his retirement home, the company selling the plot introduced him to Salman Khan’s father, veteran screenwriter Salim Khan. Over the years, the two families reportedly maintained cordial relations.
For more than two decades, relations between the neighbours remained friendly. Kakkad has previously stated that whenever his family visited the property, they were warmly received by members of the Khan family. The relationship, however, deteriorated significantly after Kakkad returned to India in 2014 with plans to permanently settle on the property and construct a small cottage and spiritual retreat near a temple situated on the land.
Origins of the Property Dispute
The dispute revolves around approximately 2.5 acres of land located on a hill overlooking Salman Khan’s farmhouse in Panvel. Kakkad claims ownership rights over the property and alleges that he was unlawfully prevented from accessing and developing it.
According to Kakkad, the land allotment in his favour was subsequently cancelled by the Maharashtra Forest Department. He has alleged that the cancellation occurred due to the influence of Salman Khan and his associates. He further claims that a gate erected near the farmhouse obstructed his access to the property and prevented him from freely entering and exiting the land.
Kakkad has also alleged that roads leading to the property were blocked, electricity connections were disrupted, and structures built by him, including an eco-friendly dwelling and a Ganapati temple, were demolished. Additionally, he accused certain forest department officials of relying on allegedly fabricated and backdated records to classify the land as private forest.
His legal team has argued that a large iron gate constructed around Salman Khan’s estate encroaches upon land claimed by Kakkad and effectively prevents him from enjoying the full use of his property.
Salman Khan has consistently denied all allegations levelled against him. According to the actor’s legal team, Kakkad had attempted to purchase land adjacent to the farmhouse, but the transaction was subsequently cancelled by authorities because it was allegedly not legally permissible.
ALSO READ: Black Buck Poaching: Rajasthan High Court to Hear Salman Khan’s Appeal on September 22
Khan’s counsel has maintained that the actor had no role whatsoever in the cancellation of the transaction and that Kakkad’s allegations emerged only after the deal fell through. The actor has rejected claims of encroachment, obstruction of access, or interference with Kakkad’s property rights. The dispute eventually escalated into multiple legal proceedings involving land ownership issues, access rights, and allegations concerning the use of the surrounding property.
As the dispute intensified, Kakkad began posting videos and messages on various social media platforms detailing his grievances. Through these videos, he made several allegations concerning activities allegedly taking place at Salman Khan’s Panvel farmhouse.
Some of the videos attracted significant public attention and garnered substantial viewership. In one such video, Kakkad compared Salman Khan to historical figures Babar and Aurangzeb and alleged that efforts were being made to shut down a Ganapati temple. He also referred to the Ayodhya Ram Temple issue, framing parts of the dispute in religious and communal terms.
These videos generated widespread discussion online, with numerous social media users posting comments critical of Salman Khan and his family.
Salman Khan’s Defamation Suit
In response to the online campaign, Salman Khan approached the civil court by filing a defamation suit against Kakkad. The actor sought judicial intervention to restrain Kakkad from publishing or circulating further statements that he claimed were false, defamatory, and damaging to his reputation.
The suit also named several social media intermediaries and content platforms, including Google, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, and certain content creators, as parties to the proceedings.
ALSO READ: Salman Khan Shooting Case: MCOCA Court Denies Bail to Lawrence Bishnoi Gang Member
Khan argued that the allegations circulated online were not only defamatory but also communal in nature and capable of creating social discord. He sought an interim injunction preventing Kakkad from continuing to publish such content pending final adjudication of the dispute.
However, Salman Khan’s request for interim relief was rejected by a Sessions Court in Mumbai. Additional Sessions Judge Anil Laddhad declined to grant a temporary injunction restraining Kakkad from making further public statements.
The court noted that Kakkad had produced documentary material, including complaints and official notices, relating to his allegations. Based on the material placed before it at that stage, the court observed that there was prima facie evidence supporting some aspects of Kakkad’s grievances.
The trial court concluded that Kakkad’s statements appeared to be based on documents available on record and treated him as a whistleblower acting in public interest. Consequently, the court refused to restrain him from speaking about the dispute and also imposed costs on Salman Khan.
High Court’s Observations
Aggrieved by the refusal of interim relief, Salman Khan challenged the order before the Bombay High Court.
Senior Advocate Ravi Kadam, appearing for the actor, argued that the trial court had committed serious errors in appreciating the material on record. He contended that Kakkad’s videos contained speculative allegations and were designed to provoke public opinion against Khan.
According to Khan’s legal team, the online content crossed the boundaries of fair criticism and entered the realm of character assassination and reputational harm.
On the other hand, Kakkad’s lawyers, advocates Abha Singh and Aditya Singh, argued that the defamation proceedings were being used as a means to pressure their client into abandoning his claims regarding the disputed property.
While hearing the appeal on June 11, Justice Sharmila Deshmukh expressed concern over the continued publication of social media content relating to a matter already pending before courts.
The Court questioned why Kakkad felt the need to continue addressing the dispute through online videos and social media posts when multiple legal proceedings concerning the same issues were already underway.
Justice Deshmukh advised Kakkad to consider deleting content posted by him against Salman Khan and reiterated that social media should not become a platform for unchecked allegations against individuals.
The High Court has not yet delivered a final verdict on Salman Khan’s appeal. The matter remains pending, and the Court is expected to continue examining whether the circumstances justify granting an injunction against further publication of the disputed content.
The case represents an important intersection between property disputes, freedom of expression, social media accountability, and the law of defamation. The final outcome could have broader implications for how courts balance an individual’s right to speak publicly about grievances against another person’s right to protect their reputation.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE