Salman Khan's 'Kala Hiran' Suit: Delhi High Court Issues Notice On Producer Amit Jani's Jurisdiction Challenge

Justice Tejas Karia asked Khan to reply within four weeks and listed the application for December 16, along with the other pending matters in the case.

The proposed movie is stated to be inspired by Khan's 1998 blackbuck poaching case.

Jani's application seeks return of Khan's plaint under Order VII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure. This provision lets a court send a suit back to the plaintiff if it has been filed in a court that does not have territorial jurisdiction to hear it.

Jani's counsel pointed out that Khan is based in Mumbai while Jani is based in Meerut. He relied on the Sameer Wankhede ruling, which he said holds that a person complaining about content put out through a social media handle must sue where the greatest harm is suffered. In his submission, that place is Mumbai.

Khan's counsel accepted notice. The court made clear this was not a final hearing on the objection.

Khan has two weeks after Jani's reply to file a rejoinder.

The court also noted that another application in the case, seeking recall of an order, was being heard the same day by Justice Jyoti Singh's special bench.

Salman Khan first approached the Delhi High Court with a personality rights suit, in which the court ordered takedown of the teaser and related clips of “Kala Hiran,” a film he says is based on him.

He then filed a fresh suit against producer Amit Jani, seeking to stop the film itself from being released. Khan told the court the film would cause him “immense harm.”

At the first hearing in that suit, Justice Jyoti Singh noted that Khan's pleadings did not say when the film was due out and that no agreement between the parties was on record.

Khan's side pointed to material suggesting the makers had indicated a September release, and argued that while a theatrical release needs censor board certification, an OTT release does not.

Jani's counsel, appearing virtually, first said he had no instructions on the release date. He then told the court the film was “not in a releasable form” as it was yet to be certified.

The court recorded this as his statement, remarking, “Don't play games with the court.”

Jani was given time to file his reply and raise objections on jurisdiction and maintainability, which is the objection now before the court.

For Salman Khan: Senior Advocate Ravi Prakash with Nizam Pasha, Parag Khandhar, Chandrima Mitra, Tapan Radkar, Krishan Kumar, Zara Dhanbhoora and Charu Sharma