38.6c New Delhi, India, Saturday, March 28, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
CelebStreet

Kamaal R Khan Moves Bombay High Court Against Restraining Order in Salman Khan Defamation Suit

By Nargis Bano      19 September, 2021 11:27 AM      0 Comments
Kamaal R Khan Moves Bombay High Court Against Restraining Order in Salman Khan Defamation Suit

Actor Kamaal R Khan (KRK) has petitioned the Bombay High Court to overturn a restraining order issued by a Mumbai court in response to a defamation complaint filed by Bollywood actor Salman Khan.

The Mumbai City Civil Court issued the injunction on June 23, 2021, prohibiting KRK from creating and uploading videos, posting, tweeting, or publishing any defamatory content, directly or indirectly, about Salman Khan, his business ventures, and films/projects, including the most recent film 'Radhe.'

KRK filed an appeal with the High Court against this "blanket order," claiming that he was a film critic whose job it was to review films.

Justice AS Gadkari was informed by Advocate Parag Khandhar, who is representing Khan, that the appeal was served late last night and that he needs some time to respond to it.

As a result, the case was postponed for two weeks with the instruction that all respondents be served.

KRK sought the revocation of the June 2021 order in his appeal, which was filed through Advocate Manoj Gadkari. The following are just a few of the grounds that KRK has taken:

Because the ingredients for granting an injunction had not been met, the lower court made a grave error in granting a blanket injunction preventing KRK from posting content.

That once a creator has made his creation public, he cannot prevent the public from forming an opinion about it, even if the opinion is negative;

As a film critic, he is free to review films that have been made available to the public, or to declare whether an actor or actress is a success or a flop.

The lower court should have limited its orders to the alleged defamatory statements in the suit rather than issuing a blanket order prohibiting KRK from publishing his comments on current and future films, and the order is in the nature of a gag order, which is improper.

The lower court erred in issuing a temporary injunction as "final relief" instead of a permanent injunction because the prayers in the notice of motion and the suit are identical, which is not permissible.

Khan and his company Salman Khan Ventures Private Limited sought Rs. 90 lakh in damages from KRK for allegedly defamatory remarks, videos, and online content posted by KRK against Khan.

It was also claimed that in another video posted in November 2020, KRK made claims against Khan's brand 'Being Human,' claiming that the charity organisation was involved in fraud and money laundering.

Such false allegations, according to Khan, will tarnish the goodwill, reputation, and image of his brand, which he has built over years of hard work and effort.

Khan and his business ventures are being represented by a DSK Legal team that includes Managing Partner Anand Desai, Partner Chandrima Mitra, and Khandhar.



Share this article:



Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS

section-377-ipc-not-applicable-to-consensual-sexual-acts-between-husband-and-wife-during-marriage-mp-high-court
Trending Judiciary
Section 377 IPC Not Applicable to Consensual Sexual Acts Between Husband and Wife During Marriage: MP High Court [Read Order]

MP High Court holds Section 377 IPC not applicable to sexual acts between husband and wife, partly quashing FIR in dowry and abuse case.

27 March, 2026 03:44 PM
mention-of-quantity-type-in-arrest-notice-sufficient-under-bnss-exact-quantity-not-mandatory-kerala-hc
Trending Judiciary
Mention of Quantity Type in Arrest Notice Sufficient Under BNSS, Exact Quantity Not Mandatory: Kerala HC [Read Order]

Kerala HC rules that mentioning nature of contraband quantity in arrest notice is sufficient under BNSS; exact quantity need not be specified.

27 March, 2026 04:07 PM

TOP STORIES

conversion-to-religion-other-than-hinduism-buddhism-or-sikhism-strips-sc-status-sc
Trending Judiciary
Conversion To Religion Other Than Hinduism, Buddhism Or Sikhism Strips SC Status: SC

Supreme Court rules conversion from Hinduism, Sikhism or Buddhism leads to loss of SC status; SC/ST Act protection denied to Christian convert.

24 March, 2026 05:20 PM
privacy-vs-prohibition-sc-to-examine-legality-of-breathalyser-based-enforcement-in-bihar
Trending Judiciary
Privacy vs Prohibition: SC to Examine Legality of Breathalyser-Based Enforcement in Bihar

Supreme Court to examine legality of breathalyser tests under Bihar Prohibition law, raising key issues on privacy, evidence, and Article 21 rights.

25 March, 2026 06:14 PM
sc-reverses-high-court-acquittal-in-child-rape-case-directs-all-high-courts-to-strictly-follow-ban-on-disclosure-of-victims-identity
Trending Judiciary
SC Reverses High Court Acquittal In Child Rape Case; Directs All High Courts To Strictly Follow Ban On Disclosure Of Victim’s Identity [Read Judgment]

SC restores conviction in child rape case, reverses acquittal, and directs strict compliance with law prohibiting disclosure of victim identity.

26 March, 2026 02:05 PM
allahabad-hc-grants-anticipatory-bail-to-swami-avimukteshwaranand-saraswati-in-pocso-case-rules-section-29-presumption-not-applicable-at-pre-arrest-stage
Trending Judiciary
Allahabad HC Grants Anticipatory Bail to Swami Avimukteshwaranand Saraswati in POCSO Case, Rules Section 29 Presumption Not Applicable at Pre-Arrest Stage [Read Order]

Allahabad High Court grants anticipatory bail to Swami Avimukteshwaranand Saraswati, rules Section 29 POCSO presumption not applicable at pre-arrest stage.

26 March, 2026 02:25 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email