The Delhi High Court has sought actor Salman Khan’s response to an application filed by the makers of Kala Hiran: The Battle for Legal, who have asked the court to stay the proceedings in the actor’s suit seeking to restrain the film’s release.

According to PTI, Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani issued notice to Salman on Tuesday after producer Amit Jani argued that the dispute over the proposed film substantially overlaps with an earlier personality-rights case filed by the actor.

Salman Khan has sought restrictions on the release of the film, which is purportedly based on him. The latest application by the filmmaker claims that allowing both matters to proceed separately would result in parallel litigation over the same film, its promotional material and the alleged violation of Salman’s personality or publicity rights.

Story continues below.
Subscribe to see fewer ads.

Why have Kala Hiran makers sought a stay?

According to the application, Salman Khan had already filed a suit seeking protection of his personality rights, in which the Delhi High Court granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction on December 11, 2025.

The actor later filed another application seeking an interim injunction specifically against the proposed film. According to producer Amit Jani’s plea, that application is still pending.

The filmmaker has argued that the relief Salman is seeking in the present proceedings, including restrictions on the release, exhibition and dissemination of the film and its teasers, is substantially similar to the relief sought in the earlier case.

The producer has therefore contended that the proceedings amount to parallel litigation concerning the same dispute.

Story continues below this ad

Delhi HC had earlier ordered removal of Kala Hiran teaser

The legal dispute between Salman Khan and the makers of Kala Hiran had earlier led to an interim order from the Delhi High Court. On July 27, a coordinate bench directed online platforms to remove the film’s teaser and other related posts after the actor objected to the content.

While passing the order, the court said the makers of Kala Hiran could not use the 59-year-old actor’s name, mannerisms and other distinctive attributes for commercial gains without his authorisation. It also restrained the dissemination of material that could harm his reputation.

The court observed that the use of social media to circulate material allegedly violating personality rights or harming reputation can worsen the situation because of the “speed, reach and permanence” of digital publications.

Story continues below this ad

Makers say Kala Hiran is not Salman Khan biopic

The makers of Kala Hiran have maintained that the proposed film is not a biopic on Salman Khan. They have also argued that the actor cannot use personality-rights protection “to erase” public events connected with the blackbuck controversy.

The film has been linked to the blackbuck poaching case involving the actor, but its makers have maintained that their project does not amount to an unauthorised portrayal of the actor’s life.

The filmmaker had earlier told the court that the movie was not yet ready for release as it had not received certification from the censor board. They also said that its trailer had not been released.

Salman Khan accuses filmmakers of sensationalising blackbuck case

Salman Khan, in his application, has accused the filmmaker of deliberately attempting to “sensationalise” the poaching case and generate headlines to attract public attention at the expense of his goodwill and reputation.

Story continues below this ad

His restraint application forms part of his broader lawsuit seeking protection of his personality rights.

The actor had earlier approached the Delhi High Court seeking directions against various social media platforms and e-commerce websites over what he alleged was the unauthorised use of his name, images, persona and likeness.

What happens next in Salman Khan’s Kala Hiran case?

The Delhi High Court has now issued notice to Salman Khan on the filmmakers’ application seeking a stay. The actor will have to respond to the plea before the court considers submissions from both sides and decides the matter.