Delhi High Court Initiates Contempt Action Against Reliance Entertainment Over Dues Linked To ‘Indian Police Force’ Web Series
Bench while directing to pay outstanding amount held that if amount is not deposited within the stipulated time, concerned directors could face 4 weeks of imprisonment
The Delhi High Court has held Reliance Entertainment Studios Private Limited and its directors liable for contempt in a dispute involving financing arrangements relating to projects including the Amazon Prime Video web series “Indian Police Force”. The Court found that the company failed to comply with earlier directions requiring it to deposit amounts payable to Super Cassettes Industries Pvt. Ltd. (T-Series) under a loan agreement executed for film and web-series projects.
Consequentially, the bench directed to deposit the outstanding amount along with interest at 12.5% within two weeks, and further warned that if the amount is not deposited within the stipulated time, the concerned directors could face four weeks of imprisonment.
In the matter, T-Series had approached the Court seeking recovery of ₹60.23 crore allegedly owed under a Loan Agreement dated 19-05-2021. According to the plaintiff, the Court had earlier directed the defendant to deposit ₹7.42 crore receivable from Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd. and to account for revenues from the release of two projects, the film “Crakk” and the web series “Indian Police Force”. T-Series alleged that despite these directions, Reliance Entertainment released the projects and failed to deposit the full amount as ordered.
Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora while refusing to accept the argument that the series had been commissioned by Amazon Seller Services Pvt. Ltd. to Rohit Shetty Pictures LLP for rendering line production services and all rights in the web series are owned by Amazon and not by the defendant, observed, “A screenshot of the credit has been placed on record. The Defendant has not denied the aforesaid contention of the Plaintiff with respect to display of its name in the credits of the said web series. In the considered opinion of this Court, the Defendant’s stand that it has not produced or co-produced the said web-series is prima facie negated by the said display of the Defendant’s name in the credits of the said web series. No document/agreement has been filed by the Defendant to substantiate its plea that it was merely line producer in this web series”.
On noting that the defendant only pursuant to the further directions issued by the Court on 17-09-2025 and 19-09-2025 complied with the said direction issued in the order dated 08-04-2025 and filed its affidavit on 21-10-2025, the Bench further observed, “This conduct of the Defendant shows its consistent manner of not complying with the directions of this Court in a timely manner without being directed again and again; and thus, shows wilful disregard for legal process”.
Senior Advocate Amit Sibal appeared for the plaintiff and Senior Advocate Saurabh Kirpal appeared for the defendant.
After examining the record, the Court concluded that the defendants had not fully complied with the orders dated 23-11-2023 and 19-12-2023, noting that only a partial payment had been made. The Court observed that such conduct amounted to non-compliance with its directions and therefore warranted action under contempt jurisdiction.
Consequently, the Court directed the defendants to deposit the outstanding amount along with interest at 12.5% within two weeks. It further warned that if the amount is not deposited within the stipulated time, the concerned directors could face four weeks of imprisonment. The Court also directed them to furnish bail bonds of ₹1 lakh each before the Joint Registrar, while keeping the sentence suspended for two weeks to allow compliance.
The Bench further clarified that until the defendant has not made the requisite deposit as directed, the plaintiff shall have a continuing cause of action against the defendant and its directors for maintaining a fresh contempt petition.
Cause Title: Super Cassettes Industries Private Limited v. Reliance Entertainment Studios Private Limited [Neutral Citation: 2026:DHC:1971]
Appearances:
Petitioner: Amit Sibal, Sr. Adv., Harsh Kaushik, Darpan Sacheva, Srishti Mishra, Harsh Prakash, Saksham Dhingra and. Vinay Tripathi, Advocates.
Respondent: Saurabh Kirpal, Sr. Adv., Malvika Kapila Kalra, Tanwangi Shukla, Junaid Aamir, Harbani S. and Apoorva Jain, Advocates.