The Delhi High Court on Wednesday rejected a petition seeking a stay on the scheduled release of the web series UP 77, which claimed that the programme allegedly drew from the life of slain gangster Vikas Dubey, who was killed in a police encounter in Uttar Pradesh in July 2020.
The single-judge Bench of Justice Sachin Datta dismissed the petition filed by Dubey’s widow, Richa Dubey, invoking the Court’s civil jurisdiction to restrain the producers and the streaming platform from releasing or broadcasting the series.
The petitioner asserted that the web series amounted to an unauthorised biographical portrayal, intruded upon her family’s private life, and infringed her fundamental right to privacy, dignity and reputation under Article 21 of the Constitution.
During the hearing, the producers and the over-the-top (OTT) platform Waves—operated under the aegis of Prasar Bharati—submitted that UP 77 was a fictional narrative and did not purport to depict the life of any real individual, including the petitioner’s deceased husband.
The respondents placed reliance on disclaimers proposed to be displayed prior to each episode, clarifying that the content was a work of fiction and bore no connection to actual persons or events. The producers further undertook to ensure that no promotional material, publicity content or marketing collateral made any reference, direct or indirect, to Vikas Dubey.
The Court recorded these statements and noted that the respondents were willing to formalise their assurances by way of an affidavit, undertaking or public declaration.
On this basis, the Bench held that, at the interim stage, no case was made out for the grant of injunctive relief, particularly in the absence of material demonstrating a clear and direct reference to the petitioner or her husband in the impugned content or its promotions.
While declining to stay the release of the series, the Court directed the producers to file an affidavit within the stipulated period affirming that the web series was not based on the life of Vikas Dubey and that appropriate disclaimers would be prominently displayed. The Court also recorded that it would monitor compliance with these undertakings during the pendency of the proceedings.
The matter was directed to be listed for further consideration on January 7, 2026.
The petition had alleged that the series sensationalised and fictionalised events surrounding Dubey’s life and death for commercial gain, thereby reopening past trauma for the petitioner and her children, who were stated to have consciously withdrawn from public life following the incident. The plea contended that such depiction amounted to a continuing invasion of privacy and risked exposing the family to stigma, ridicule and potential safety concerns.
The Court had earlier issued notice to the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, the streaming platform, and the producers, seeking their response to the plea. It, however, remained circumspect in exercising prior restraint, consistent with established jurisprudence that courts must tread cautiously while curbing creative expression at a pre-publication or pre-broadcast stage, unless a clear case of irreparable harm or manifest illegality was demonstrated.
Vikas Dubey had been accused of orchestrating the killing of eight police personnel in Kanpur in July 2020. He was arrested a day later after surrendering in Madhya Pradesh but was shot dead during transit to Uttar Pradesh, with the police claiming that the firing occurred in self-defence following an alleged escape attempt.
His death triggered widespread public debate and legal scrutiny, leading to the constitution of a judicial inquiry commission headed by former Supreme Court judge Justice B S Chauhan. The inquiry commission subsequently gave a clean chit to the Uttar Pradesh Police with respect to the encounter, while recommending action against certain officials for their alleged patronage of Dubey.
The Supreme Court later directed that the commission’s report be made public and that appropriate action be taken on its recommendations.
Against this backdrop, the High Court’s refusal to stay the release of UP 77 underscored the judiciary’s continued reluctance to impose prior restraints on expressive works, particularly where producers furnished undertakings and disclaimers, and where adjudication of alleged rights violations could be undertaken after the content entered the public domain.
The post Delhi High Court refuses to stay release of web series UP 77 appeared first on India Legal.