Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 12240
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
Sameer Jain, J
PHONOGRAPHIC PERFORMANCE LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7225/2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: R.N. Mathur, Vijay Choudhary, Ankur Sangal, Ram Singh Gurjar, Sauhard Alung, Mani, Harsh Parashar
For the Respondents:
The court is examining whether administrative authorities have the jurisdiction to interpret the Copyright Act to exempt wedding and religious functions from copyright licensing requirements.
Headnote:(A) Jurisdiction - Interpretation of Statutes - Administrative officers issuing circulars to interpret statutory exemptions under the Copyright Act is ultra vires to their powers. (Para 3, 4)
(B) Copyright Infringement - Wedding/Religious Functions - Whether the use of sound recordings in marriage ceremonies falls under the exemption of Section 52(1)(za) of the Copyright Act, 1957. (Para 3, 9)
Issues: Whether the Additional Commissioner of Police has the jurisdiction to interpret the Copyright Act to exempt wedding functions from copyright licensing requirements.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to administrative circulars interpreting copyright exemptions for wedding functions. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. reliance on judicial precedents and the withdrawal of dpiit circulars. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's admission of the petition and determination of the scope of copyright in marriage events. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
Order
1. The matter is admitted
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner has challenged the impugned circular dated 24.06.2025 issued by Additional Commissioner of Police, Jaipur and the impugned action dated 18.02.2026, whereby the Additional Commissioner of Police, withdrew the circular dated 24.06.2025, while incorrectly relying on the withdrawn circular of DPIIT dated 24.07.2023 and keeping the illegal circular dated 24.06.2025 active.
3. It is submitted that the petitioner owns and/or controls the public performance and has a repertoire which contains a number of international and domestic sound recordings, inter alia, literary, dramatic work, artists and other persons who are holding copyright qua the music albums, songs etc. It is submitted that vide impugned circulars, learned Additional Commissioner of Police has exceeded jurisdiction inasmuchas he has interpreted the provisions of Section 52(1)(za) of the Copyright Act, 1957 and has opined that the said provisions provides an exemption for wedding function from the scope of infringement of copyright and therefore no copyright license is required to be taken from the copyright owners or any copyright society for exploitation of sound recordings, for such events inclusive of religious ceremonies.
4. It is primarily submitted that the Additional Commissioner of Police has no jurisdiction to issue the above stated clarification, as the same is ultra vires to his powers and jurisdiction; subsequent to the said contention it is submitted that the Additional Commissioner of Police has wrongly interpreted the provisions of Section 52(1)(za) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Nonetheless, it can be noted that with changing circumstances and time, the use of musician bands, artists etc. is not limited to commercial industry, and the same are being indulged even in family functions and wedding ceremonies.
5. In this background, learned counsel has relied upon judgment passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in M/s Phonographic Performance Limited Versus State of Punjab and Others : C.W.P. No.7772 of 2011 and has submitted that similar issue has been adjudicated in favor of petitioner.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the circular dated 24.07.2023 issued by DPIIT, which is considered to be the foundation of issuance of the impugned circular letter dated 18.02.2026 is withdrawn in light of the judgment dated 19.05.2022 passed in CWP No. 28758/2019 by the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
7. Heard.
8. Let notices be issued.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to supply copy of the writ petition in the office of learned Advocate General as the matter in hand is of public importance as to whether marriage is a religious/social function and what are the boundaries, which are ought to be/already set, qua a function pertaining to marriage events; and whether the songs per music used in the marriage ceremonies amount to infringement of the provisions of the Copyright Act, 1957.
10. List the matter on 27.04.2026 for final disposal along with S.B.CWP Nos.15054/2015, 471/2023, after reflecting the name of Mr. Sheetanshu Sharma in the cause list as counsel for the respondents.
11. In the meantime, reply be filed.
