‘Khashaba’ Teaser Faces Copyright Challenge as Pune Court Reviews Author’s Claims
'Khashaba' Teaser Faces Copyright Challenge as Pune Court Reviews Author's Claims
Pune, 6 July, 2026: The Pune Civil Court on Saturday heard a copyright infringement case concerning the teaser of the upcoming Marathi film Khashaba, with author Sanjay Dudhane alleging that several scenes in the teaser closely resemble passages from his book Olympicveer Khashaba Jadhav.
The lawsuit, filed by Dudhane on October 10, 2024, names filmmaker Nagraj Manjule, producer Jyoti Deshpande and Jio Studios as defendants. The author claims that the film, based on the life of India’s first individual Olympic medallist Khashaba Jadhav, incorporates material from his book without obtaining his consent.
During the hearing, Dudhane submitted an affidavit identifying five scenes from the recently released teaser that he alleges correspond directly with passages in his book. According to him, these include sequences depicting Khashaba Jadhav’s interactions with the then Chief Minister of Maharashtra, British officials, wrestler Malikrao Baroda, incidents involving Punjabi wrestlers, and wrestling and mallakhamb episodes.
To support his claims, Dudhane told the court that he had submitted 19 pieces of evidence, including scene-by-scene comparisons between the teaser and his book, relevant documents and an affidavit filed as part of his ₹5 crore damages suit. He also referred to an agreement involving Khashaba Jadhav’s son, Ranjit Jadhav.
Speaking after the hearing, Dudhane said the affidavit clearly specifies the five scenes he believes match the content of his book. He maintained that the similarities were substantial, though the court is yet to determine the merits of the allegations.
The teaser for Khashaba was released on Thursday, just days before the latest hearing. The copyright dispute has been pending before the Pune Civil Court since 2024. During the initial hearing on October 16, 2024, the court declined to grant interim relief sought by the petitioner but issued show-cause notices to the respondents.
The matter later came before a new judge after the case was reassigned. Dudhane’s counsel informed the court that an earlier application had sought the appointment of a judicial commissioner to compare the film with the book before its release. The court was also informed that the film had not yet been released.
The case has now been adjourned, and the Pune Civil Court will continue hearing the matter as it examines the evidence and submissions presented by both parties.
