The Delhi High Court has suspended 125 websites and ordered the takedown of one blogspot page for allegedly misusing the Jio trademark to offer lottery and gaming services, granting Reliance Industries an ad interim injunction.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has directed domain name registrars to suspend 125 websites, along with a further web page hosted on a blogging platform, which allegedly use the registered JIO mark of Reliance Industries Limited for lottery, gaming and payment-related services, and has restrained the operator of the sites from using the mark in any form [Reliance Industries Limited v. Rahul Meena and Others].
Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav passed the ad interim order on October 7, 2026, in a commercial suit filed by the telecom and conglomerate major. The suit is at an early stage, the findings are prima facie, and the defendants have yet to file their replies.
The case
Reliance Industries Limited told the Court that its JIO mark is registered and well known. It alleged that the impugned websites, run on domain names containing the mark and variants such as “JIO LOTTERY” and “JIO LOTTERY GAME”, display the mark and associated logos in full to invite users to lottery and gaming services. According to the plaintiff, the use is likely to confuse and deceive members of the public into believing that the services are connected with Reliance or Jio, and it dilutes the mark and harms its goodwill. These are the plaintiff’s allegations and have not been tested at trial.
The suit names Rahul Meena as the first defendant, several domain name registrars and hosting entities, the Union of India through the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology and the Department of Telecommunications, Blogger (operated by Google) and a John Doe defendant. The list of impugned addresses, filed as Annexure-A, groups the primary websites of the first defendant, mirror and redirecting sites, and sites with a similar structure.
The rogue website test
After examining the websites and their content, the Court relied on its earlier decision in UTV Software Communication Ltd. v. 1337X.to, which laid down the test for identifying a rogue website. The Court held that the test is qualitative, not quantitative, and found that the sites prima facie meet it.
the real test for examining whether a website is a Rogue Website is a qualitative approach.
Justice Kaurav recorded that the websites “prima facie seem to satisfy the test of rogue website”. On that footing, the Court found a case for interim protection pending the hearing of the injunction application.
The directions
The Court issued the following interim directions:
1. The first defendant is restrained from registering, operating, controlling, promoting, advertising or using JIO, JIO LOTTERY, JIO LOTTERY GAME or any mark identical or deceptively similar to the plaintiff’s mark, including in domain names.
2. The domain name registrars and related defendants must suspend the websites and accounts listed in Annexure-A until further orders.
3. Blogger must disable access to, and take down, the specified blogspot page.
The Court also exempted the plaintiff from pre-institution mediation under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act because the suit seeks urgent interim relief, relying on Yamini Manohar v. T.K.D. Keerthi. Exemption from service on the first defendant for the ex parte application and from the notice requirement under Section 80 CPC was granted, and the plaintiff may file additional documents within 30 days.
What happens next
Summons have been issued in the suit. Written statements are due within 30 days, and the plaintiff may file a replication within 15 days thereafter. The defendants must reply to the interim application within four weeks, with a rejoinder to follow within three weeks. The injunction application will be taken up on November 30, 2026, and the parties will appear before the Joint Registrar on December 10, 2026 for marking of exhibits.
Why the order matters
The order applies the rogue website framework to a trademark misuse case where the mark itself is the lure for lottery and gaming services, and shows that the Court is willing to order suspension at the registrar level, including of mirror and redirecting sites, at the ad interim stage. It is an interim order only: the Court has not finally adjudicated the allegations, and the defendants are free to contest the suit.
Case Title: Reliance Industries Limited v. Rahul Meena and Others [CS(COMM) 1043/2026]
Bench: Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, Delhi High Court
Date of Order: October 7, 2026
Appearances: Advocates Ankit Sahni and Chirag Ahluwalia for the plaintiff; Advocates Aditya Gupta and Angela Arora for Defendant No. 11; SPC Shivanshu Bhardwaj with GP Manish Rawat for Defendant Nos. 12 and 13