Shiva Stuti v. Veera Raja Veera: Protecting Original Raga-Based Musical Works

Introduction

The Delhi High Court’s decision in Ustad Faiyaz Wasifuddin Dagar v. A.R. Rahman & Ors. (2025 DHC 2907) marks a watershed in Indian copyright law by affirming that original compositions in Hindustani classical music—even when based on traditional Ragas—enjoy full protection.

Background: Ustad Faiyaz Wasifuddin Dagar (“Plaintiff”), heir to the Junior Dagar Brothers, alleged that A.R. Rahman (“Defendant No. 1”) and co-defendants incorporated his family’s Raga Adana composition “Shiva Stuti” into the film Ponniyin Selvan – 2’s song “Veera Raja Veera” without authorization or attribution.

Key Issues:

Whether “Shiva Stuti” is an original musical work entitling it to copyright protection.
Whether “Veera Raja Veera” infringes the Plaintiff’s copyright in “Shiva Stuti.”
Appropriate interim relief and recognition of moral rights pending final trial.

Summary of the Judgment

Justice Prathiba M. Singh held that:

The suit composition “Shiva Stuti,” though based on traditional Raga Adana in the Dagarvani Dhrupad style, is a clearly original work of the Junior Dagar Brothers and thus protected by copyright.
The impugned song “Veera Raja Veera” reproduces the core melodic “hook,” rhythmic cycle (Sultaal), Swara sequences and distinctive handling of notes of “Shiva Stuti,” establishing prima facie substantial similarity and infringement.
Defendants’ defenses—relying on common Raga elements, expert testimony and Western notation—failed to rebut the lay-listener test showing the “soul” of the Dagar Brothers’ composition had been lifted.
Interim relief was granted: Defendants must amend on-screen and online credits to read—“Composition based on Shiva Stuti by Late Ustad N. Faiyazuddin Dagar and Late Ustad Zahiruddin Dagar”—and deposit ₹2 crore to secure Plaintiff’s claim.

Analysis

Precedents Cited

Eastern Book Co. v. D.B. Modak, (2008) 1 SCC 1 – Originality arises from author’s skill and labour, not novelty. Compilations gain copyright if they demonstrate “modicum of creativity.”
Ram Sampath v. Rajesh Roshan, 2008 SCC OnLine Bom 370 – In musical works, even a small, vital “hook” can be copyrighted; infringement tests the “ear,” not the “eye.”
Indian Performing Right Soc. Ltd. v. Eastern Indian Motion Pictures, (1977) 2 SCC 820 – Urged legislative reform to recognize composers’ and performers’ rights where music forms part of films.
Supra-numerous U.S. authorities (Marcus Gray v. Hudson et al.) – While foreign Federal Circuits emphasize excluding public-domain building blocks, they recognize that distinctive arrangements may be protected.

Legal Reasoning

The Court’s analysis unfolded in three stages:

Originality and Authorship:
- Though based on Raga Adana—a public-domain framework—the “Shiva Stuti” composition by the Junior Dagar Brothers exhibits unique selection, permutation and presentation of Swaras, coupled with a ten-beat cycle (Sultaal) and characteristic syncopations, satisfying Section 13’s “original work” test.
- Evidence: 1978 Amsterdam recital recording, 1996 PAN Records album, published inlay cards, family undertaking transferring rights to Plaintiff.
Prima Facie Infringement:
- Access: Disciples (Defendants No. 5 & 6) presented “Shiva Stuti” to Rahman; on-screen credit acknowledges Dagarvani tradition.
- Substantial Similarity: Lay-listener test complemented by notation charts shows the impugned song reproduces core melodic motif, rhythmic cycle, and characteristic “drag” of notes—composing the “soul” of “Shiva Stuti.”
- Defendants’ defenses—public-domain Raga grammar, Western notation, expert affidavit suggesting mélanges in Jaunpuri/Kanada—cannot override audible identity of the Dagar Brothers’ melodic hook.
Interim Relief and Moral Rights:
- Section 57 (moral rights) and judicial precedents uphold a composer’s right to paternity (credit) and integrity. Monetary damages cannot fully repair loss of recognition once the film and song have been widely released.
- Interim orders were fashioned to secure Plaintiff’s rights pending trial by mandating corrected on-screen/online credits and a security deposit—balancing equities without disrupting theatrical/OTT exhibition.

Impact

This judgment clarifies vital principles for future copyright cases involving Indian classical music:

Original Raga-based compositions enjoy full statutory protection; adherence to public-domain Raga grammar does not bar copyright.
“Lay-listener” ear test remains paramount: courts will assess melodic identity rather than require expert-only analyses.
Even brief melodic “hooks” are protectable if they embody the heart of a composition.
Moral rights (attribution) are enforceable even after wide release; interim remedies may mandate correct credits and security for claims.

Complex Concepts Simplified

Raga: A framework of scales and rules (Aroha, Avroha, Pakad) forming the “grammar” of Indian classical music.
Composition vs. Raga Grammar: A composer’s unique arrangement of Raga elements (note choices, drags, syncopations) yields an original work, even as the underlying Raga remains in public domain.
Lay-Listener Test: In music copyright, what the average listener “hears”—the soul of the melody—governs infringement more than purely technical notation comparisons.
Moral Rights (Section 57): Composers in India have rights to be credited (paternity) and to protect the integrity of their works against distortion or false attribution.

Conclusion

The Delhi High Court’s decision in Ustad Faiyaz Wasifuddin Dagar v. A.R. Rahman & Ors. firmly establishes that copyright law in India fully protects original musical compositions—even when rooted in ancient Raga traditions. By safeguarding the “Shiva Stuti” composition and recognizing the Dagar Brothers’ moral rights, the Court has struck an equitable balance: promoting artistic creativity while ensuring that landmark works in Indian classical music receive the credit and protection they deserve.