Court holds that alleged transmission of authorised channels from Surat’s DAS area into Kathor village was at most a regulatory or contractual violation, not a prima facie offence under the Copyright Act.
The Gujarat High Court has quashed a criminal FIR lodged against two cable network operators in Surat Rural, ruling that the dispute over transmission of pay TV channels into a non-DAS area did not amount to criminal copyright infringement.
Justice P.M. Raval, while hearing a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, set aside FIR II-C.R. No. 454 of 2014 registered at Kamrej Police Station against Bhupatbhai Manjibhai Sindhav and another accused for alleged offences under Sections 63, 65 and 69 of the Copyright Act, 1957.
The case arose from a complaint by an IPR consultant of Taj Television (India) Pvt. Ltd., who alleged that the applicants, though authorised to broadcast channels in Surat city, were illegally retransmitting those signals in Kathor village, which was claimed to fall outside the DAS Phase-II area. The complaint said the operators were using signal equipment and broadcasting channels such as Cartoon Network, Pogo, HBO, CNN International, Zee Cinema, Zee Talkies, Zee Telugu, Zee Premier, Ten Cricket and Ten Action without permission.
The applicants argued that no copyright offence was made out because the dispute related only to the territorial reach of transmission. They contended that they had commercial arrangements and authorisation for broadcasting within Surat city, and that any issue regarding Kathor village concerned compliance with TRAI guidelines and the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995, not the Copyright Act. They also submitted that the complainant was not the competent authority to initiate such proceedings.
The complainant, in reply, maintained that the applicants had no valid agreement for Kathor village after the expiry of an earlier arrangement and that the retransmission of signals outside the DAS area amounted to unauthorised signal piracy. The State supported this position and argued that the accused had exceeded the authorised territorial limits.
After examining the record, the High Court held that the central issue was the distinction between a DAS area and a non-DAS area, which flows from administrative notifications and regulatory guidelines under the cable television framework, not from copyright law. The Court observed that the alleged act, even if accepted as true, amounted at best to a breach of regulatory conditions or contractual terms.
The Court further noted that Section 63 of the Copyright Act requires knowing and deliberate infringement. Where a commercial relationship already exists between the broadcaster and the cable operator, a dispute over whether signals were transmitted only within Surat city or spilled over into Kathor village does not by itself establish the necessary criminal intent.
Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, the High Court held that continuing the criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of law, as the matter was essentially civil, contractual, or regulatory in nature rather than a cognizable copyright offence.
Accordingly, the FIR and all consequential proceedings against the applicants were quashed and set aside.
Bottom Line :
Copyright Act, 1957 - Quashing of FIR - Mere territorial spillover of authorized cable signals from DAS area to non-DAS area, in backdrop of existing commercial relationship between broadcaster and cable operator, constitutes at best regulatory/contractual dispute under Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act and TRAI framework, and does not prima facie make out offences under Sections 63, 65 and 69 of Copyright Act - FIR quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. applying Bhajan Lal principles.
Statutory provision(s): Section 482 Cr.P.C., Sections 63, 65 and 69 of the Copyright Act, 1957, Section 51 of the Copyright Act, 1957, Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995, TRAI guidelines
Bhupatbhai Manjibhai Sindhav v. State of Gujarat, (Gujarat) : Law Finder Doc id # 2987693
