In a temporary relief for Dhurandhar director Aditya Dhar, the Bombay High Court on Wednesday restrained filmmaker Santosh Kumar from making any further comments about the film that could be defamatory. The matter was heard by single-judge Justice Arif Doctor, who considered brief submissions from senior advocate Dr Birendra Saraf, appearing for Dhar. Saraf urged the court to at least pass an interim order, pointing out that Kumar had been making defamatory statements in the media against both the film and Dhar.
Details of the hearing
After hearing the arguments, the court passed an ex-parte interim order, directing Kumar not to make or repeat any such comments until further orders. The bench observed that a prima facie case had been made out at this stage and issued notice to Kumar. The matter has now been posted for further hearing on April 16, as per Live Law.
What is the Dhurandhar controversy all about?
The dispute began after the release of Dhurandhar: The Revenge, when Santosh Kumar held a press conference and alleged plagiarism. According to Dhar, Kumar accused him of copying a script that he claimed to have registered with the Screenwriters Association in 2023.
Kumar also stated that he had earlier discussed his original script, titled D Saheb, with several major production houses. He alleged that before any deal could move forward, Dhar copied the script and went on to make the film.
Referring to the impact of these claims, the suit states: “The Plaintiff and his team were shocked and dismayed to come across numerous videos/video clips recorded during or extracted from the recording of the said Press Meet, which have been independently uploaded, republished and circulated by various accounts, including but not limited to the said Accounts, thereby resulting in widespread and repeated dissemination of the Defamatory Statements. During the course of the said Press Meet, Defendant No. 1has made several false, scandalous, grossly defamatory, derogatory and denigrating statements about the Plaintiff which harm and malign the reputation and goodwill ofthe Plaintiff, before the world at large,”
Saraf told the court that after the press conference, Dhar had sent a legal notice to Kumar, asking him to refrain from making what he described as unsubstantiated allegations. Dhar maintained that the claims were baseless, defamatory, and had damaged his reputation. The senior advocate also argued that since Kumar had himself indicated legal action during the press conference, he was free to pursue it through proper legal channels.
“A proper response will be given to the legal proceedings, initiated, if any. But till then, he must refrain from using such a language,” Saraf told the court.
Despite receiving the legal notice, Santosh Kumar neither responded nor appeared before the court on Wednesday. Taking note of this, Justice Doctor granted ad-interim relief, restraining Kumar from making any further defamatory statements. The case will next be heard on April 16.
