Delhi High Court Supports A.R. Rahman In Copyright Case Over 'Veera Raja Veera' From 'Ponniyin Selvan 2'

The Delhi High Court has recently ruled in favour of A.R. Rahman in a copyright dispute over the song 'Veera Raja Veera' from 'Ponniyin Selvan 2'. The court accepted Rahman's plea, granting him the benefit of the doubt. Justices C. Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla noted they had not examined the copyright infringement aspect, suggesting a need to redefine Section 2 of the Copyright Act if every musical composition were to be copyrighted.

In April 2025, a single judge ordered Rahman and two production companies to pay Rs 2 crore to Ustad Fayaz Wasifuddin Dagar. The court also mandated compensation of Rs 2 lakh to Dagar within four weeks and required changes in song credits to include Dagar's father and uncle. This case involved Madras Talkies and Lyca Productions Private Limited, co-owned by Mani Ratnam, along with two singers.

Copyright Dispute Over 'Shiva Stuti'

The controversy centred on the alleged copyright infringement of 'Shiva Stuti', composed by the junior Dagar brothers. The legal heirs of Dagar's father and uncle, who passed away in 1989 and 1994 respectively, had transferred their copyright rights to Dagar. The previous verdict highlighted that while some words differed, the basic musical structure mirrored 'Shiva Stuti'.

The court's decision is anticipated to influence future copyright cases involving film songs. In a prior ruling, it was stated that although there were word changes giving the song a new form, its core musical composition remained identical to 'Shiva Stuti'. This case could potentially set a new standard in how copyright issues are addressed in film music.

Legal Proceedings and Implications

The Dagar family initially demanded Rs 2 crore from Rahman and the production houses involved. The case was filed against Thirupath vocal artist Ustad Fayaz Wasifuddin Dagar. The court's detailed ruling is expected soon, providing further clarity on this complex issue.

This report provides an overview of recent developments in this legal matter. While efforts have been made for accuracy based on available information, it should not replace official court orders or legal advice. The final ruling by the court will serve as the definitive source of information regarding this case.