The Delhi High Court has ruled that original compositions based on Hindustani classical music traditions can be protected under copyright law, provided they exhibit sufficient creativity and originality.
Justice Prathiba M Singh held that while foundational elements like ragas and taals remain in the public domain, composers who create distinct musical works using these traditional frameworks are entitled to copyright protection under the Copyright Act, 1957.
“A composition in Hindustani classical music would have to follow the structure and rules of a Raga to identify as a composition within the said Raga. However, the various possibilities and choices available to a composer within the structure of a Raga are several in number,” the Court said.
Hence, songs which are derived from original classical music based compositions can infringe copyright, the judge held.
She further noted that the legislature had also evolved the law to protect works based on Hindustani classical music.
“It is also necessary to consider the reason for the legislature to evolve/amend the Act to extend protection to certain creative works, including to works based on Hindustani classical music,” the judgment stated.
The observations were made in an interim order passed in a copyright infringement suit filed by Ustad Faiyaz Wasifuddin Dagar (plaintiff) against legendary composer AR Rahman (defendant).
Dagar alleged that Rahman’s song “Veera Raja Veera”, featured in Ponniyin Selvan 2, was derived from “Shiva Stuti”, a Dhrupad composition credited to the Junior Dagar Brothers.
Rahman and the film’s producers denied infringement, arguing that Shiva Stuti was a traditional composition, and no exclusive rights could subsist over classical works adhering to public domain structures like Raga Adana.
The Court navigated this tension between preserving access to traditional knowledge and protecting individual creative contributions. Justice Singh ruled affirmatively on the broader legal principle, holding that:
Ragas, taals, and stylistic traditions form part of the public domain and are free for all to use.
However, when a composer arranges, selects, and expresses musical notes within these frameworks in an original and creative manner, that specific composition qualifies as a “musical work” eligible for copyright protection under Section 13 of the Copyright Act, 1957.
The Court noted the plaintiff’s argument that though there is no copyright in the Raga, the musical compositions are themselves original in nature. Every composer can set the composition to a particular Raga, which would then become the original composition of that compose
The Court established that composers working within traditional frameworks can create original, copyrightable works.
Justice Singh elaborated on this concept by drawing a parallel between Saptaswara and English literary works.
“All Classical music compositions are based on the eight Swaras – Sa, Re, Ga, Ma, Pa, Dha, Ni, Sa. Similarly, all English literary works would be based upon the same English alphabet A – Z. Every Raga is based on the principles prescribed for a Raga. Similarly every language is bound by the rules of grammar too.”
Thus, the Court clarified that while no one can claim ownership of a raga itself, the specific creative expression within that framework can be protected, much like how no one owns grammar but authors own their novels.
“The core of the impugned song Veera Raja Veera is not just inspired but is in fact identical in Swaras (notes), Bhava (Emotion) and Aural impact (impact on the ear) of the suit composition Shiva Stuti, from the point of view of a lay listener,” the judge said.
Hence, she specifically rejected Rahman’s defense that any similarities were merely due to both works following the discipline of the same raga.
“If the impugned song is not based on Raga Adana, the defendants are not bound by the principles of the said Raga or discipline of the said Raga. Thus, the defence being taken by the Defendant that the particular composition sounds similar because of the discipline of the Raga is also completely untenable and baseless,” the Court opined.
Justice Singh stressed upon the “lay listener test” rather than technical notation analysis, noting that in Indian classical music tradition, “it is the sound of the music or the aural effect of the music that would be the test.”
A significant finding was that Rahman had deliberate access to the original composition. Two singers of the song were disciples of the plaintiff and Rahman had specifically sought compositions from the Dagarvani tradition.
“The selection of a composition based on the Dagarvani tradition, especially the ‘Shiva Stuti’, was a conscious and deliberate choice made by the Defendant No.1, who is himself an acclaimed composer of global renown,” the Court said.
In its order, the Court crafted a set of remedies balancing recognition for the original composers with commercial realities.
