ORDER

1. The present suit has been instituted for a decree of mandatory and permanent injunction restraining defendant No. 3 from exhibiting, broadcasting, telecasting and releasing on its digital/OTT platforms, the series titled `Trial by Fire`. The web series is to be aired on 13 January 2023. The plaintiff further seeks a decree of mandatory and permanent injunction against the defendants from publishing the book `Trial by Fire: The Tragic Tale of Uphaar Fire Tragedy' [The Book], including and extending to publication of audio/video adaptations of the Book and from exhibiting, broadcasting, telecasting defamatory, libellous, slanderous and false statements made by way of the Book on digital/OTT platforms. A further relief of delivery-up is also sought against the defendants.

2. The Court has heard Mr. Siddharth Agarwal, learned senior counsel appearing for the plaintiff, Mr. Sethi who appeared for defendant Nos. 1 and 2, the producer and co-producer of the web series in question, Mr. Nayar and Mr. Sibal, learned senior counsels, on behalf of defendant No. 3, Mr. Pahwa, learned senior counsel who appeared for defendant Nos. 4 and 5, the authors of the Book and Ms. Bhandari, learned counsel who appeared for defendant No. 6 which had published the Book.

3. Parties have addressed submissions before this Court on the application for ad interim injunction which has been moved and in terms of which prayers identical to those that are sought in the principal suit are claimed by way of interim injunctive reliefs. For the purposes of appreciating the submissions which have been addressed, it would be pertinent to note the following salient facts.

4. On 13 June 1997, a fire broke out at the erstwhile Uphaar Cinema situate at Green Park, New Delhi. 59 innocent persons are stated to have lost their lives in the said incident. Investigation in respect of that incident was transferred to the Central Bureau of Investigation on 23 July 1997. Apart from the above, FIR No. 207/2006 is also stated to have been registered against the plaintiff and other named accused in relation to allegations pertaining to evidence tampering. On 20 November 2007, the competent court passed judgment in Sessions Case No. 13/2007 [hereinafter for the sake of brevity to be referred to as the "Main Uphaar Case"] wherein the plaintiff was convicted for offences under Sections 304A together with Sections 337 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [IPC] read with Section 14 of the Cinematograph Act, 1952. The plaintiff was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years along with a fine of Rs.5,000/-. The plaintiff is stated to have preferred an appeal against the aforesaid judgment of conviction which was disposed of by way of an order of 19 December 2008 with this Court while upholding the conviction, modifying and reducing the sentence imposed to a period of one year together with fine of Rs.5,000/-.

5. The plaintiff is stated to have assailed the aforesaid judgment by way of Crl. Appeal No. 597/2010 before the Supreme Court. On the said appeal, the Supreme Court upheld the conviction of the plaintiff. However, the learned Judges comprising the Bench differed on the issue of sentencing. The matter was consequently referred to a Bench comprising of three learned Judges of the Supreme Court. On 22 September 2015, the Supreme Court enhanced the punishment awarded to the plaintiff from one year to two years with an option to pay a fine of Rs.30 crores in lieu of the additional one year of imprisonment which had come to be imposed. It was further provided that in the event the fine were to be paid by the plaintiff, the sentence would stand reduced to the period of incarceration already undergone. The Association of Victims of Uphaar Tragedy preferred review petitions which came to be dismissed on 09 February 2017.

6. Insofar as the evidence tampering case is concerned, the Trial Judge vide judgment dated 08 October 2021 convicted the plaintiff under