Court allows conditional screening of ‘Rangoon’

In a temporary relief to the makers of ‘Rangoon’, the Bombay High Court on Thursday allowed a ‘conditional’ release of the film that would be hitting the screens on Friday. The HC has also asked the makers of the film to deposit an amount of Rs two crore as a guarantee with the court registry.

A single-judge bench of Justice Kalpathi Shriram was hearing the commercial suit filed by Nadia Movietone Pvt. Ltd. against Bharadwaj, alleging copyright infringement.

While pronouncing the interim order, Justice Shriram said, “I am inclined to pass an order in favour of the plaintiffs (Nadia Movietone). Till then, you (Vishal Bharadwaj & Viacom 18) can deposit a guarantee amount with the court and this would be refunded post the disposal

of the suit.”

However, as Justice Shriram has now indicated that he would be passing orders in favour of Nadia firm, it is obvious that he can allow the prayers made by the film production firm.

The plaintiffs have in their suit prayed for deletion of scenes wherein actress Kangana would be delivering her dialogues. They have also sought damages of nearly Rs 20 crore.

The contention of the Nadia firm was that the makers of ‘Rangoon’ have stolen the script of their movie ‘Hunterwali’ which starred Australian actress Mary Evans as the ‘Fearless Nadia’. The firm has alleged that Bharadwaj has copied the character of Evan and also her dialogues which would be portrayed by Bollywood actress Kangana Ranaut.

On the other hand, producers of the film have maintained that the film is based on actual and historical events. They also claimed that the film is made by relying on the information that was available in public domain.

The makers also contended that there was no law to deter the use of similar character or to prevent character infringement.

Countering the allegations of the plaintiffs, the producers claimed that there was no evidence to show that UTV motions handed over the Nadia’s film’s script to them.

The producers also argued that they have not indulged in ‘plagiarism.’