Team Herald
PANJIM: The High Court of Bombay at Goa has dismissed former Chief Minister Churchill Alemao’s appeal restraining Bhanushali Studios Limited, the Bombay Fables Motion Pictures and the director Sejal Shah from releasing/screening film ‘Costao.’
In his application, Churchill had sought temporary injunction to restrain the respondents from carrying on any further production of the suit movie (Costao) and from releasing the same in theatres or OTT platform or any other source in India or abroad, including from release of its trailer.
The appellant had also prayed for a direction for screening of the film in the presence of the Trial Court, himself and his family members before release of its poster, teaser and movie itself and to appoint a committee of experts to view the film and to submit a report to the Court.
Churchill had further prayed for directions to the defendants to pay him Rs 100 crore by way of damages or compensation for defamatory act and for Commission and Omission.
The applicant had stated that the film being produced was solely based on the narrative given by a retired Customs officer Costao Fernandes, in complete ignorance of various judicial proceedings that were initiated in respect of the incident, and which are contained in various judgments of the Court and of the Supreme Court.
The film is a production not based on the complete narrative or rather based on an incomplete narrative of the facts of the particular incident and is in the nature of detaining the plaintiff and his family members harming his reputation, his public image and his political status.
Stating that no gold was ever confiscated or recovered by Costao, the applicant stated that the narrative of the basis of the film, that the Customs Department have managed to establish a gold smuggling case against the Alemao clan is false. If the film is produced and released it would portray the plaintiff and his family as a “Villain”.
The defendants clarified that the film was a fictionalised work inspired by the narration in the decision of the Supreme Court of India of 20.02.1996, of a real-life incident involving the plaintiff, his late brother (Alvernaz) and Costao. It further states that the film does not purport to be a true story and is a fictional account in which the real-life incident may have inspired the film. The film contains a specific disclaimer that any resemblance to persons, past or present is purely incidental.
The High Court observed that none of the publishers of the news items mentioned by the appellant were not added as defendants in the suit, even though relief against media houses and publishers were sought.