ADVERTISEMENT

Delhi HC Orders ‘Chhapaak’ Makers to Give Credit to Laxmi’s Lawyer

Delhi’s Patiala House Court had recently directed the makers of the film to give lawyer Aparna Bhat credit. 

Updated
Celebrities
2 min read
Vikrant Massey, Meghna Gulzar and Deepika Padukone.
i

The Delhi High Court, on Saturday, directed filmmakers of Chhapaak, Fox Studios and Meghna Gulzar, to give credit to lawyer Aparna Bhat, who represented Laxmi Agarwal in her legal battle, ANI has reported.

Yesterday, the Delhi High Court had reserved judgement on Fox Studios and Meghna Gulzar’s appeal against the Patiala House Court order until Saturday, 11 January. On 9 January, the lower court had directed the makers of the Deepika Padukone-starrer to give lawyer Aparna Bhat credit in the film.

Just before the release of the film, Bhat, who represented Laxmi in her criminal trial in the Patiala House Court, filed a plea seeking stay on Chhapaak. She had posted a message on Facebook saying that she was ‘deeply disturbed post watching the film’ as the makers haven’t mentioned her name in the film or given her credit.

ADVERTISEMENT

The advocate wrote in a Facebook post dated 8 January, “Have never been the one to demand attention to my work. Deeply disturbed by the turn of events post watching Chhapaak. Compelled to take legal action to protect my identity and preserve my integrity. I represented Lakshmi in her criminal trial in Patiala House Courts... tomorrow someone will represent me in my cause...Ironies of life.”

In another post, she wrote, “I thank all my friends who endorsed my contribution and challenged team Chhapaak in failing to say even "Thank you!!". I cannot match the powers of these mighty producers of Bollywood but keeping quiet will further endorse injustice. I have decided to take my cause to the next level. Ready to face the consequences.”

Meghna had filed an affidavit in response to Aparna’s lawsuit, saying that the suit was "wholly misconceived, frivolous, legally untenable and unmeritorious."

The suit fails to make out any case of copyright infringement, the affidavit said, adding information available in public domain is not protected under the Copyright Act.

(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)

ADVERTISEMENT
Published: 
ADVERTISEMENT
Stay Updated

Subscribe To Our Daily Newsletter And Get News Delivered Straight To Your Inbox.

Join over 120,000 subscribers!
ADVERTISEMENT