The Madras High Court has put a hold on the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) provisional attachment of renowned Tamil filmmaker S Shankar’s property, valued at Rs. 10 crore, in connection with a copyright infringement case related to the 2010 blockbuster movie Enthiran.
A division bench comprising Justice MS Ramesh and Justice N Senthilkumar granted the stay after considering a plea filed by Shankar, challenging the ED’s action. The case arose after Arur Tamilnadan lodged a complaint, alleging that the story of Enthiran was inspired by his work, Jugiba. Based on this complaint, the ED invoked the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and provisionally attached Shankar’s property on February 17.
Background of the Dispute
The controversy traces back to a civil suit filed by Arur Tamilnadan against Shankar, which was dismissed by a single judge of the Madras High Court in June 2023. The court, at the time, ruled that copyright protection could not be claimed over an idea or concept, stating that there was no evidence proving Enthiran was a literal imitation of Jugiba.
Despite this earlier ruling, the ED proceeded with its action against Shankar, prompting the filmmaker to move the High Court seeking relief.
Court Questions ED’s Action
During the hearing, Senior Advocate PS Raman, representing Shankar, argued that the ED’s move was arbitrary, especially when the single judge had already ruled that there was no copyright violation. He further questioned the ED’s claim that Shankar had received Rs. 11.5 crore from the project, asserting that the director's earnings were from other works and not directly linked to the disputed copyright claim.
The High Court also raised serious concerns regarding the ED’s justification for its action:
“Can the ED register cases based on an individual’s complaint that a crime has been committed? Why didn’t the ED wait for the outcome of the complaint before attaching the property?” the court questioned the counsel representing the ED.
In response, ED’s counsel Vishnu cited the ruling in Vijay Madhanlal Choudhary, arguing that the agency had the authority to initiate proceedings based on a complaint from an individual. He also claimed that no harm had been caused to Shankar due to the attachment, implying that there was no immediate need for interference.
Following the hearing, the Madras High Court directed the ED to file its counter to Shankar’s plea and scheduled the next hearing for April 21.
The case raises important legal questions about the scope of the ED’s authority and its ability to act on individual complaints, especially in matters involving intellectual property disputes.
Case Title: S Shankar v. The Deputy Director
Case No: WP 8352 of 2025
Next Hearing Date: April 21, 2025
This case will be closely watched, as it could set a precedent for how copyright disputes are handled in relation to financial investigations under PMLA.
