Why The Supreme Court Is Right In Its Decision On Section 63 Of The Copyright Act, 1957

In a major relief to copyright holders, the Supreme Court recently clarified in the case of M/s Knit Pro International v. The State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.¹ that copyright infringement is a cognizable and non-bailable offence. The dispute originally arose between Knit Pro International, a company engaged in the manufacturing of knitting needles and Mr. Anurag Sanghi (the petitioner in the High Court case). Mr. Sanghi manufactured certain goods infringing Knit Pro’s copyright. Knit Pro therefore filed three cases of infringement before the lower courts, which went in their favour, leading Mr. Sanghi to institute a case in the Delhi High Court (HC) on the grounds that copyright infringement is not a cognizable and non-bailable offence. The Delhi HC ruled in favour of Mr. Sanghi, which led Knit Pro to appeal to the Supreme Court.

Whether copyright infringement is a bailable and non-cognizable offence or not has been a contentious issue, with various high courts giving different interpretations of the law. The Hon’ble Karnataka HC in the case of ANI Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Karnataka² as well as the Hon’ble Rajasthan HC in the case of Nathu Ram S/o Purna Ram v. The State of Rajasthan³ held that offences under Section 63 of the Copyright Act, 1957 ought to be cognizable and non-bailable given that the maximum term of punishment is imprisonment for three years. In fact, in the ANI judgment, the judge also noted that via the 1984 amendment to the Copyright Act, the maximum imprisonment that could be imposed under Section 63 was increased from a period of one year to three years. The reasons for doing this were quite clear- the parliamentary intent was to make copyright a non-bailable, cognizable offence. In contrast, the Hon’ble Delhi HC in State Govt. of NCT of Delhi v. Naresh Kumar Garg⁴ as well as the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh HC in the case of Amarnath Vyas v. State of A.P. held that the offences under the Copyright Act are non-cognizable and bailable. 

In all the aforementioned cases, the point of legal ambiguity has been as follows- offences under Section 63 of the Copyright Act for copyright infringement are punishable with imprisonment for a term “which shall not be less than six months but which may extend to three years.” As per the Indian Criminal procedure Code, 1973, only if the prescribed punishment for a cognizable offence is “three years and upwards” does the offence become cognizable and non-bailable. Since there is a possibility of granting a punishment of less than 3 years of imprisonment for copyright infringement, there was a difference of opinion within the various High Courts as to whether copyright infringement would fall under the ambit of cognizable and non-bailable offences.  

The Supreme Court decision in the Knit Pro case has cleared the air by stating that since there is a possibility that the accused under Section 63 may be sentenced for a period of 3 years also, offences under Section 63 are cognizable and non-bailable. This SC decision reinforces the fact that copyright infringement is a serious offence, and copyright protection needs to be strictly enforced. The threat of a jail term would act as natural deterrent for anyone. Music labels who have borne the brunt of copyright infringement will welcome this decision.

This ruling will be the first step towards plugging the economic losses arising out of piracy, and this is essential given that India was reported as the top market in terms of film and music piracy between January and September 2021.⁵ Hopefully, it will also help to change the lackadaisical mindset that the corporate sector and society have towards copyright infringement. This will in turn have a positive impact on millions of livelihoods including those of producers, songwriters, musicians, performers and other stakeholders associated with the creative sector.

[1] Ms_Knit_Pro_International_vs_State_of_NCT_of_Delhi.pdf (assettype.com)

[2] https://iprlawindia.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Case.pdf

[3] https://indiankanoon.org/doc/125003057/

[4] 2013 SCC OnLine Del 1142

[5]-https://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/music-piracy-plummeted-in-the-past-5-years-but-in-2021-it-slowly-started-growing-again/