The Delhi High Court on Wednesday set aside an interim injunction issued by a single-judge bench against music composer A.R. Rahman in a copyright infringement case related to the composition of the song 'Veera Raja Veera' from the Tamil film Ponniyin Selvan 2. The decision was made by a division bench comprising Justices C. Harishankar and Om Prakash Shukla, following an appeal filed by Rahman. The case was initiated by classical musician Faiyaz Wasifuddin Dagar, who alleged copyright infringement.

The court stated, "We have allowed the appeal. The order of the single-judge bench has been set aside on principle." However, the bench clarified that it has not examined the merits of the copyright infringement claim itself.Also Read: KSLSA Invites Applications for Part-Time Legal Volunteers; Application Deadline: October 20; Honorarium of ₹750 per Day

Dagar, a Padma Shri-awarded Indian classical singer, had filed the lawsuit before the single-judge bench, claiming that 'Veera Raja Veera' was a copy of the song 'Shiva Stuti,' composed by his father, Nasir Faiyazuddin Dagar, and uncle, Zahiruddin Dagar. In contrast, Rahman argued that 'Shiva Stuti' is a traditional composition in the Dhrupad style, available in the public domain. He contended that 'Veera Raja Veera' is an original work, created using 227 distinct layers of Western musical elements, transcending the traditions of Hindustani classical music.Monte Carlo Mens Solid Lace Up Genuine Leather Casual Shoes (201803FW)

On April 25, the single-judge bench had ruled in favor of Dagar, directing Rahman and the film’s producers to credit the Dagar brothers on all online platforms. Additionally, it imposed a fine of ₹2 lakh and ordered Rahman and the producers to deposit ₹2 crore as security.

Rahman subsequently appealed the decision. On May 6, the division bench imposed a stay on the single-judge bench’s interim injunction and also suspended the imposed fines. However, it directed Rahman and the producers to deposit ₹2 crore as per the single-judge bench’s order, clarifying that this directive was not related to the merits of the appeal.