Disclaimer: This has been reported after the availability of the order of the Court and not on media reports, so as to give an accurate report to our readers.
Delhi High Court: In a commercial suit filed by JioStar India Pvt. Ltd. (‘JioStar India’) seeking protection of exclusive broadcast and digital media rights over ICC cricket events, Jyoti Singh, J., granted an ex parte ad interim injunction restraining rogue mobile applications and associated websites from unlawfully streaming and communicating the matches. The Court held that JioStar India had established a prima facie case of infringement of Broadcast Reproduction Rights under Section 37 of the Copyright Act, 1957, and that immediate relief was necessary to prevent irreparable loss.
Background
JioStar India asserted that it had acquired exclusive television and digital media rights for various ICC events, including the ongoing ICC Under-19 Men’s Cricket World Cup 2026 and the upcoming ICC Men’s T20 Cricket World Cup 2026, under a Media Rights Agreement with the ICC.
Defendants 1 to 4 were rogue android-based applications and websites illegally hosting and streaming the matches without authorisation, thereby making the content available to the public free of cost. Domain Name Registrars (‘DNRs’), Internet Service Providers (‘ISPs’), and Government authorities were arrayed to facilitate enforcement of blocking orders.
JioStar India submitted that the defendants were habitual offenders who repeatedly resurfaced through mirror and variant domains in violation of the orders passed in Star India Pvt. Ltd. v. Movieblast application,1 and JioStar India Pvt. Ltd. v. Cricfy TV.2 Any delay in protection would result in loss of subscription revenue and dilution of exclusive rights.
Issues:
Whether the plaintiff was entitled to an ex parte ad interim and dynamic injunction against rogue mobile applications and associated websites from streaming ICC events?
Analysis
At the outset, the Court examined whether the plaintiff had established enforceable rights and a case of infringement based on the material facts of the case. The Court noted that the plaintiff had acquired exclusive television and digital media rights for the ICC events under a Media Rights Agreement and consequently enjoyed Broadcast Reproduction Rights under Section 37 of the Copyright Act, 1957. Therefore, any unauthorised streaming, hosting, retransmission, or communication of the broadcasts by third parties would prima facie amount to infringement.
The Court observed that Defendants 1 to 4 were rogue mobile applications and associated websites which provided unauthorised access to JioStar India’s copyrighted broadcasts. The material on record indicated ongoing and systematic dissemination of the matches without a licence. The Court held that such conduct directly encroached upon JioStar India’s exclusive commercial rights and caused immediate revenue loss.
The Court noted that JioStar India had established a prima facie case for the grant of ex parte ad interim injunction, particularly because the events were live and time-bound. Balance of convenience lies in JioStar India’s favour, and if the injunction is not granted, it shall cause irreparable harm and injury to JioStar India. The Court also emphasised that a delay in blocking infringing platforms during an ongoing sporting event would render the remedy ineffective.
The Court noted that a similar remedy was passed in the case of Universal City Studios LLC. v. Dotmovies Baby 2023 SCC OnLine Del 4955, wherein the Court granted an injunction protecting the work generated during the course of pendency of the suits. The Court stated that:
“To keep pace with the dynamic nature of the infringement that is undertaken by hydra-headed websites, this Court has deemed it appropriate to issue this ‘Dynamic injunction’ to protect copyrighted works as soon as they are created. This is done to ensure that no irreparable loss is caused to the authors and owners of copyrighted works, as there is an imminent possibility of works being uploaded on rogue websites immediately”.
The Court further noted that piracy through rogue websites and mobile applications is recurring and adaptive, with infringers frequently resurfacing through mirror or variant domains to evade blocking orders. The Court directed domain name registrars, internet service providers and Government authorities to block identified and future infringing URLs to secure effective protection of the plaintiff’s broadcast rights. Lastly, it directed JioStar India to file affidavits of any newly discovered applications that might be engaging in similar infringement.
Ultimately, the Court granted an ex parte ad interim injunction restraining the rogue applications and their operators from communicating or streaming the events which JioStar India licensed.
[JioStar India (P) Ltd. v. GHD Sports , CS(COMM) 89 of 2026, order dated 30-01-2026]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner: Sidharth Chopra, Yatinder Garg, Priyansh Kohli, Ishi Singh and Manish Singh
1. CS(COMM) 837/2024.
2. CS(COMM) 1203/2025.