Citing prior leaks and the imminent threat of online piracy, the Bombay High Court has restrained unknown infringers and directed ISPs and digital platforms to block present and future infringing links of ‘Namit Malhotra’s Ramayana’ ahead of release. The Court granted ad-interim relief restraining John Does from recording, copying, uploading, downloading, streaming, distributing, communicating to the public or otherwise making available the film or any part of it without the Producer’s authorisation.
The Court directed the Internet Service Provider defendants to immediately block or disable access to infringing URLs and to block additional mirror, redirect, proxy or similar infringing websites and URLs as may be notified by the plaintiff, subject to their right to raise objections. The Court also directed social media and messaging platform defendants to remove, disable access to or de-index infringing content, posts, videos, reels, channels, groups, accounts and links carrying the film or any part thereof, and to take similar action against further infringing content identified by the plaintiff.
Additionally, the Court directed that upon receiving intimations from the plaintiff regarding infringing content, the ISP and platform defendants must promptly act in accordance with the blocking and takedown directions. The ad-interim protection will continue until the next date of hearing.
Briefly, Godpower Media Private Limited filed a commercial IP suit before the Bombay High Court seeking protection of its copyright and related rights in the cinematograph film “Namit Malhotra’s Ramayana” and its underlying works, including the script, screenplay, music, sound recordings, visual effects, footage, trailers, teasers and promotional material. The suit was filed both for past instances of copyright infringement and as a quia timet action to prevent anticipated piracy upon the film’s release.
The plaintiff stated that the film, directed by Nitesh Tiwari and produced at an estimated cost of about Rs. 2,000 crore, is scheduled for theatrical release on 5 November 2026. According to the plaintiff, the film had already suffered multiple leaks before release, including unauthorised recordings of Trailer No. 1 from a confidential launch event and leaks of portions of Trailer No. 2 and other unreleased content across online platforms. More than 4,500 infringing links relating to such leaks had been identified through the plaintiff’s anti-piracy efforts.
The plaintiff further submitted that several websites had already begun displaying links claiming to offer the film for free viewing online and expressed a genuine apprehension that pirated copies would become available immediately after release through rogue websites, social media platforms, messaging applications, torrent portals and other online channels.
A Single Judge Bench of Justice Madhav J. Jamdar observed that given the previous leaks, the existence of dormant links claiming to offer the film online, the anonymous nature of online infringers and the likelihood of immediate and irreparable harm upon release, the case warranted preventive protection. The Court found that a conventional post-infringement takedown mechanism would be insufficient and that dynamic blocking and takedown directions were necessary to effectively safeguard the plaintiff’s copyright interests.
The Court noted the extraordinary scale of the film’s production, the substantial investment involved and its staggered international release. The Court took note of the plaintiff’s case that any unauthorised online availability of the film could cause widespread and irreversible commercial harm across multiple territories and revenue streams.
The Court also considered the material placed on record showing earlier leaks of trailers and unreleased content. It observed that these incidents demonstrated a real likelihood of copyright infringement and lent credibility to the plaintiff’s apprehension that the complete film or parts thereof could be illegally recorded, uploaded, streamed and communicated to the public soon after release.
Appearances
Mr. Ashish Kamat. SR. Advocate, Mr. Rashmin Khandekar, Mr. Aneet Naik, Ms. Madhu Gadodia, Mr. Anand Mohan, Ms. Unnati Gambani & Ms. Vinayika Shahi, Parth Shah, Amartya Mody i/b Anand and Naik, for the Applicant/Plaintiff.
Mr. Akshay Ayush a/w Ms. Sneha Jaisingh i/b Bharucha & Partners, for the Defendant No. 7.
Mr. D.S. Patil, for the Defendant No. 9.
Ms. Reeti Shetty i/b Mr. Hardik Sampat, for Defendant No.29.

