Delhi HC asks Trimurti owner to not escalate dispute over song in Dhurandhar 2

The song “Rang De Lal (Oye Oye)” from Dhurandhar 2 was released under the music label T-Series, which holds the music rights for the film’s soundtrack

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday expressed displeasure over filmmaker Rajeev Rai’s conduct of making statements against Aditya Dhar’s production house and T-Series regarding the ongoing copyright infringement suit over “Rang De Lal – Oye Oye” from the film Dhurandar 2, after the court referred the parties to mediation.

On April 9, the court referred the parties to mediation and asked them to appear before the mediator on April 22. (Aditya Dhar | Official X account)

The song “Rang De Lal (Oye Oye)” from Dhurandhar 2 was released under the music label T-Series, which holds the music rights for the film’s soundtrack. However, Trimurti Films later filed a copyright infringement suit against Dhar’s production house, B62 Studios and T series, alleging unauthorised use of the song ‘Tirchi Topiwale’ from the film Tridev in the track “Rang De Lal – Oye Oye”.

On April 9, the court referred the parties to mediation and asked them to appear before the mediator on April 22.

A bench of Justice Tushar Rao Gedela observed that once a litigant invokes the judicial process, restraint in public commentary on sub judice matters is expected. The court added that while parties are free to hold personal opinions, making imputations or commenting on the dispute during the pendency of proceedings is inappropriate.

“It’s the sanctity of court proceedings, and you are before the court. You may be right or wrong. But yes, as far as the other party is concerned, you call them thieves, maybe before you came to the court, it could be right or wrong, we don’t know, but after you come to the court and we’ve sent you to mediation, are you not escalating it? You may speak anything, but if you start imputing, then it’s not correct. Please ask him not to speak,” the bench told Rai’s lawyer.

The court made these remarks while dealing with an application filed by Dhar’s production house and T-Series seeking to restrain Rai from making statements against them.

In their application, they contended that following the court’s hearing on April 9 and agreeing to mediation, Rai held a press conference and made several statements against them, including calling them “thieves.”

T-Series’ counsel Akhil Sibal, along with advocate Aditya Gupta and Nizam Pasha, appearing for Dhar, submitted that such actions were adversely affecting the film, which is currently running in theatres.

Sibal argued that a litigant could not simultaneously seek relief before the court while making public allegations, commenting on the dispute and using abusive language. He contended that the statements contained imputations against the opposing parties and amounted to running a parallel narrative in the media on a matter pending adjudication.

However, counsel for Trimurti Films submitted that although Rai’s statements were made out of anguish, he remained fully committed to the mediation process. The counsel therefore undertook that no statements would be made against the opposing parties in the press until May 6, the next date of hearing, when the court will consider Trimurti Films’ application for interim relief on merits.