What is a John Doe or Ashok Kumar order and how does it help against unidentified infringers

Question

My copyrighted content or trademark is being pirated by multiple unidentified sellers and websites, and I want a single order to cover all of them. I have been reading conflicting things online and I would like to understand what Indian law actually says about this, which Act and Section applies, what the realistic timelines and costs are, and what I should be doing right now to protect my position. If the matter can be resolved without litigation I would prefer that route, but I want to know what my rights are before I agree to anything or sign any document.

MyVakeel Legal Desk · Accepted Answer

What is a John Doe or Ashok Kumar order and how does it help against unidentified infringers is governed in India primarily by Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 and Copyright Act, 1957, Section 55. The short answer is set out below, followed by the practical steps most people in this situation need to take. Read it alongside the specific provisions named, because the exact relief available to you turns on the facts you can prove on paper.

A John Doe order, called an 'Ashok Kumar' order in Indian practice, is an interim injunction granted under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 against unnamed and unidentified defendants who are anticipated to infringe the plaintiff's intellectual property, commonly used against unknown street vendors selling counterfeit merchandise or unknown websites streaming pirated content around a major film release or sporting event.

Indian courts, particularly the Delhi High Court, have granted such orders in copyright cases under the framework of Section 55 (civil remedies for infringement) directing internet service providers to block access to a list of identified rogue websites, and more recently 'dynamic injunctions' that automatically extend to mirror or redirect websites hosting the same infringing content without requiring the plaintiff to return to court each time.

Because the defendants are unidentified at the time of filing, the plaintiff typically names them as 'Ashok Kumar' or 'John Doe' along with any known defendants, and once specific infringers are identified during enforcement (such as through a local commissioner's raid), the plaint is amended to substitute their actual names, allowing the litigation to proceed against them individually.

Courts granting John Doe relief usually balance the broad protective order against safeguards to prevent overreach, such as requiring the plaintiff to show a strong prima facie case, limiting the order's operation to a defined period around a specific event or release, and requiring innocent third parties to have a mechanism to seek exclusion if wrongly blocked.

What to do next: 1) Identify the scale and pattern of anticipated infringement, such as around a release date; 2) File suit naming known defendants along with unidentified 'Ashok Kumar' defendants; 3) Seek an interim injunction and, where relevant, a website-blocking or dynamic injunction order; 4) Use a local commissioner to identify and later substitute actual infringers.

If the other side has already issued a notice, filed a case or set a deadline, treat the matter as time-sensitive — most remedies under Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 carry limitation periods, and a delay you cannot explain weakens an otherwise strong case. You can post the details on the MyVakeel forum for a practising advocate to review, or book a paid consultation with a Bar Council verified lawyer in this practice area.