Delhi High Court Issues Notice To JioStar On Zee Entertainment's Contempt Plea Over Copyrighted Music
The Delhi High Court has issued notice on a contempt application filed by Zee Entertainment against JioStar India, alleging continued violation of an injunction order restraining use of Zee's copyrighted music.
Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani cautioned JioStar against any further non-compliance with the May 2026 order in the meantime, while directing Zee to hand JioStar a specific list of works it says are still being used without authorisation, so these can be verified and taken down.
The dispute traces back to a suit Zee filed after its licensing agreements with JioStar, dated 2017 and 2020, expired on October 31, 2025.
Zee, which owns copyright in a large catalogue of sound recordings, had licensed this music to JioStar for use across its television serials and OTT content.
Once the licences lapsed, Zee argued JioStar was bound to stop using its music altogether, but continued to find its songs playing in JioStar's shows even after repeatedly flagging the issue.
On May 5, 2026, Justice Tejas Karia passed an ad-interim injunction restraining JioStar from using, broadcasting or streaming any of Zee's copyrighted works, rejecting JioStar's suggestion that its obligation to stop should only kick in once Zee specifically identified and notified each infringing instance.
The parties were also referred to mediation at the same hearing, though that clearly did not resolve matters.
At Friday's hearing, Zee's counsel, Advocate Harsh Kaushik, argued that the injunction continues to be violated, and placed before the court what he described as the "sum total" of infringements from May and June, six works, each roughly 30 seconds long.
Counsel for JioStar, Senior Advocate Chander M Lall, argued that with a catalogue running into lakhs of works, some instances would inevitably slip through despite good-faith efforts to purge everything, and reiterated a request that Zee share metadata or "meta tags" for its works so JioStar could sit down and clear them out systematically.
The court noted this essentially amounted to arguing JioStar should be treated like an intermediary entitled to a notice-and-takedown mechanism, an argument Zee's counsel pointed out had already been rejected in the May order, since JioStar, unlike a passive intermediary, exercises full control over what it broadcasts.
The court asked Zee to specify exactly which recordings it says are currently being infringed, so JioStar could verify and act on the list. JioStar's counsel indicated compliance would follow immediately once specifics were provided.
The court issued notice on the contempt application, cautioning JioStar in the meantime against any further breach of the May 5 order.
“But I will say that in the meantime, defendant is directed to, is cautioned against any non-compliance with order,” it recorded.
JioStar was permitted to file a reply along with a supporting affidavit explaining its position that no contempt is made out.
The matter has been listed for further hearing on December 8 and before the Joint Registrar on November 17.