Entertainment

Supreme Court quashes copyright case against Sujoy Ghosh over ‘Kahaani 2’

HC refuses to quash proceedings, says no “mini-trial” at this stage; matter to be tested during trial

Representative image of Kahaani movie poster.
Representative image of Kahaani movie poster. @NNahid67725/X

In a significant relief for filmmaker Sujoy Ghosh, the Supreme Court of India on Friday swept aside the shadow of a long-standing copyright dispute linked to his film Kahaani 2, quashing all proceedings pending against him before a Jharkhand court.

A bench comprising justices P.S. Narasimha and Alok Aradhe set aside both the 2018 summoning order issued by the chief judicial magistrate (CJM) in Hazaribagh and the 22 April 2025 order of the Jharkhand High Court, which had earlier declined to intervene. “The summoning order… and the high court order are quashed and set aside,” the bench ruled, bringing the protracted legal battle to a decisive close.

The case had its origins in a complaint filed by Umesh Prasad Mehta, who alleged that his script titled Sabak had been unlawfully used in the making of Kahaani 2. Mehta claimed that after sharing his work with Ghosh — and securing a recommendation letter necessary for copyright registration — the filmmaker retained a copy of the script and later drew upon it for the film.

Published: undefined

These allegations led to the CJM court finding a prima facie case under Section 63 of the Copyright Act, 1957, prompting Ghosh to seek relief from the Jharkhand High Court. However, the high court refused to quash the proceedings, observing that it would not conduct a “mini-trial” at that stage and that the matter should be tested during trial.

Unwilling to let the case proceed further, Ghosh moved the apex court, which had issued notice to the Jharkhand government last year. With Friday’s ruling, the Supreme Court has effectively closed the chapter, removing the legal cloud that had lingered over the filmmaker for years.

The judgment underscores the court’s readiness to intervene where it finds the continuation of criminal proceedings unwarranted, offering clarity — and closure — in a case that blurred the lines between creative inspiration and alleged infringement.

With PTI inputs

Published: undefined

Follow us on: Facebook, Twitter, Google News, Instagram 

Join our official telegram channel (@nationalherald) and stay updated with the latest headlines

Published: undefined