SC urges AR Rahman to acknowledge Dagar’s contribution in ‘Veera Raja Veera’ row

The bench indicated that while legal questions of originality and authorship would have to be examined, there was a deeper issue of recognition that transcended strict legal rights

The Supreme Court on Friday impressed upon music composer AR Rahman to acknowledge the rendition and contribution of Dhrupad vocalist Faiyaz Wasifuddin Dagar in connection with the song Veera Raja Veera from the film Ponniyin Selvan II, observing that the dispute was one that ought ideally to have been resolved across the table in the larger interest of music.

The court clarified that while Dagar had made out a case on originality, question of authorship would require independent evidence. (AR Rahman | Facebook page)

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi indicated that while legal questions of originality and authorship would have to be examined, there was a deeper issue of recognition that transcended strict legal rights.

“See, there should be some acknowledgement. They are traditional worshippers of classical music. He is not in the competitive domain. They want respect and recognition,” the court told Rahman’s counsel, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi.

The bench went on to observe that the predecessors of the defendant were part of the Dagarwani tradition and that the originality of the tune was undisputed. “If these gharanas would not have contributed to shastriya sangeet, do you think these modern singers would have managed?” the court asked.

At one stage, the bench made it clear that the matter was not one that ideally should have required adjudication on legal principles alone. It suggested that the parties, both deeply rooted in music, could have resolved the issue amicably through mediation, in recognition of the shared heritage of the Dhrupad tradition.

Singhvi, appearing for Rahman, said that the composition had been performed publicly as early as 1991 by the Gundecha Brothers and on several other occasions without objection, and that the objection surfaced only in relation to Rahman’s rendition. He sought time to take instructions after the Court’s observations on acknowledgment.

The court clarified that while Dagar had made out a case on originality, the question of authorship would require independent evidence. “In originality, you have made out a case and on authorship we will examine. First performance does not necessarily mean authorship,” the bench told Dagar’s counsel.

It noted that his claim was largely inferred from first performance and that the other side had pointed to earlier Khusro-era compositions, requiring closer scrutiny. “The issue is whether you are the creator,” said the court, indicating that performance and composition are distinct under copyright law.

Dagar has claimed that Veera Raja Veera was copied from Shiva Stuti, a composition he says was created by his father Nasir Faiyazuddin Dagar and uncle Zahiruddin Dagar -- known as the Junior Dagar Brothers. According to him, while the lyrics differ, the taal, beat and musical structure are identical.

Rahman has denied the allegation, contending that Shiva Stuti is part of the traditional Dhrupad repertoire in the public domain and that Veera Raja Veera is an original work composed with Western musical elements and layered orchestration.

The court was hearing an appeal by Dagar against a September 2025 ruling of a division bench of the Delhi High Court, which had set aside an earlier single-judge interim order recognising a prima facie case of copyright infringement.

The single-judge had directed that credit for the song be shared with the Junior Dagar Brothers and had ordered Rahman and the production entities to deposit ₹2 crore with the registrar general of the high court. The division bench later reversed that direction, holding that no sufficient prima facie case of exclusive authorship had been made out at the interim stage.

On Friday, the Supreme Court revived the single-judge’s direction requiring Rahman to deposit ₹2 crore pending disposal of the suit, while adjourning the matter to February 20 for further hearing.