Continuing from my earlier post today, available over here, I would like to briefly examine whether the lawsuit in question is even maintainable under the law as it stands.
To briefly recap, since August, 2012 there have been three rounds of litigation wherein music labels have sought judicial intervention to restrain the Registrar of Copyrights from carrying on an inquiry into the state of affairs at IPRS. They have managed to succeed in large measure by filing a civil suit before Barasat Courts and have impleaded the Registrar of Copyrights as a party to the dispute. The District Judge appears to have restrained (to be confirmed) the Registrar from carrying out his inquiry any further until further hearings.
While the exact prayer of the lawsuit filed by Aasha Audio is not clear, I’m still puzzled as to how the Registrar is being restrained from carrying out his statutory duties by a District Judge adjudicating a civil suit. The reason for my puzzlement is Section 76 of the Copyright Act, 1957. I reproduce the section as follows:
76. Protection of action taken in good faith. – No suit or other legal proceeding shall lie against any person in respect of anything which is in good faith done or intended to be done in pursuance of this Act.
The above provision gives the Registrar of Copyright and any other officer of the Central Government complete immunity from any lawsuit or legal proceeding for any action under the Copyright Act, 1957. This is a standard provision in all Indian legislation and is a form of sovereign immunity, which protects the government from being sued in civil courts.
This provision obviously does not prohibit the filing of a legal proceeding before the High Courts for violation of the Constitution and the due process rights contained therein. The reason for this being the words “in pursuance of this Act” i.e. the Copyright Act, 1957.
If the Registrar of Copyrights does not have the power to carry out this inquiry or if he is executing the inquiry in an unjust manner, the only relief for Asha Audio is to approach the High Court through a writ petition under Article 226.
Why then is the Registrar being made party to these civil suits?
There is a huge strategic advantage for Javed Akhtar to have these proceedings shifted to a High Court because not only is the adjudication at High Courts of a far superior quality to anything in the District Court, but also because the Government has much better lawyers in High Courts to defend the Registrar of Copyrights. If this case lands up in a High Court the Registrar of Copyrights will be defended by an Additional Solicitor General.
I think the provision is to protect the Registrar from being sued for carrying out his duties under the Act…for e.g. if he invoked any provision of the Act against someone unjustly, but did so in good faith, i.e. without any malafide intent, he cannot be sued for it…as he was just carrying out his responsibility under the Act.
But here in, the Registrar is being restrained by the Court from carrying out certain duties. I am not contending that it is right for the District Court to do so, but does section 76, protect the Registrar from being restrained? Or does it merely protect the Registrar from a suit or legal proceeding against him for carrying out certain duties that he was supposed to?
Section 76 is a common provision, usually inserted to aid the competent authority in carrying out their statutory duties fearlessly. It will give him immunity, but cannot protect him from Court orders stopping him from doing something in his official capacity.
Hi Bhavya,
How do you say that the Registrar can be restrained when you accept my basic contention that the Registrar cannot be sued under Section 76? If the lawsuit is inadmissible, then where is the question of the Court passing any orders against the Registrar? If you can’t file a lawsuit, how do you get a restraining order?
Prashant
Hey Prashant,
The analogy I am trying to draw is this.
Under the IPC,a Police officer who arrests someone, even unfairly, cannot be sued for compensation if he did so in good faith, i.e. believing he was supposed to arrest the person.
But the Court can issue a writ of Habeus Corpus asking the person to be released and the Police has to pay heed.
Similarly, here the Registrar cannot be sued for any act of his in good faith, but I dont think that the Courts can be stopped from restraining him.
I guess the difference is personal and official capacity. Both the Police and Registrar cannot be sued for a statutory duty they performed in good faith, but they can be restrained from carrying out any duty in their official capacity by the Courts.
This is just my opinion, I could be wrong!
Hi Bhavya,
The distinction is between a civil law suit before a civil court and a writ petition before a constitutional court.
S. 76 bars civil law suits, not constitutional challenges. The Copyright Act cannot control the powers of a High Court under a Constitution and therefore Asha Audio can still move the High Court for relief.
Prashant
oh!
Now i get it.
Thank You for clarifying that point 🙂