Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Copyright Proceedings Against Sujoy Ghosh in Kahaani-2 Script Dispute

Summary

In a significant ruling on criminal copyright infringement and abuse of legal process, the Supreme Court of India in the case of Sujoy Ghosh vs The State of Jharkhand & Anr.[1] quashed criminal proceedings initiated against filmmaker Sujoy Ghosh in relation to alleged copyright infringement of the film ‘Kahaani 2: Durga Rani Singh’ (Kahaani-2).

The Court set aside the summoning order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate and the decision of the Jharkhand High Court, holding that the complaint was based on bald and unsupported allegations without any material showing similarity between the works. Emphasizing that criminal law cannot be used as a tool of harassment in copyright disputes, the Court held that summoning of an accused requires careful judicial application of mind and prima facie evidence of infringement.

Facts of the Case

Sujoy Ghosh, a well-known filmmaker and director of the film ‘Kahaani’, developed the script for ‘Kahaani 2: Durga Rani Singh,’ which was registered with the Screen Writers Association in 2013.

The complainant alleged that he had written a script titled ‘Sabak’ and had shared it with the appellant in 2015, claiming that the film ‘Kahaani-2’ released in 2016 was based on his script and amounted to copyright infringement under the Copyright Act, 1957. The Screen Writers Association, after examining both works, concluded that there was no similarity between them.

Despite this finding, the complainant filed a criminal complaint, and the Magistrate issued summons against the appellant. The Jharkhand High Court refused to quash the proceedings, leading to an appeal before the Supreme Court.

Issues before the Court

Whether the criminal complaint disclosed a prima facie case of copyright infringement and whether the summoning order and High Court decision amounted to abuse of process of law.

Findings of the Court

The Supreme Court held that summoning an accused in criminal proceedings is a serious matter and requires careful scrutiny of the complaint and supporting material. The Court found that the complaint contained only bald allegations without identifying any specific similarity between the script ‘Sabak’ and the film ‘Kahaani-2’.

The Court also noted that the Screen Writers Association had already determined that no similarity existed and that the appellant’s script was registered prior to the complainant’s script, making allegations of copying unsustainable. It observed that both the Magistrate and the High Court failed to properly examine these material facts and allowed criminal proceedings to continue without sufficient evidence.

Held

The Supreme Court held that the criminal proceedings were frivolous and vexatious, as no prima facie case of copyright infringement was made out. It observed that the summoning order was passed mechanically without proper application of mind and that continuation of proceedings amounted to abuse of process of law.

Accordingly, the Court quashed the summoning order, set aside the High Court judgment, and terminated the criminal proceedings pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh.

Conclusion

The judgment reinforces that criminal copyright infringement proceedings must be supported by clear prima facie evidence of similarity and copying, and courts must exercise caution before summoning accused persons in intellectual property disputes. It also highlights the importance of expert evaluation and prior registration of scripts in determining authorship and originality.

By quashing the proceedings, the Supreme Court has reaffirmed that criminal law should not be misused to harass creators in copyright disputes, thereby strengthening safeguards for filmmakers and authors against vexatious litigation.

[1] SLP (Crl.) No. 9452 of 2025