By S&S Co. Advocates & Solicitors · Published 29 September 2026 · Informational content, not legal advice. See our disclaimer
The Problem: Infringers You Can't Yet Identify
Counterfeiters and pirates are often unknown or numerous at the time a rights holder discovers infringement: a market full of unidentified stalls selling fake goods, or an unknown set of websites streaming pirated content. Conventional injunctions naming specific defendants are of limited use against parties who haven't yet been identified.
What a 'John Doe' / Ashok Kumar Order Does
Indian courts, drawing on the English 'John Doe' practice and adapting it under the name 'Ashok Kumar' orders, grant injunctions against unnamed and unidentified defendants described by their infringing conduct, allowing a rights holder to enforce the order against any person later found engaging in that conduct: such as anyone selling counterfeit goods bearing the plaintiff's mark, or any website found streaming the plaintiff's copyrighted content without authorisation.
How the Order Is Used in Practice
Once granted, the order typically authorises a court-appointed Local Commissioner, often accompanied by police, to conduct search-and-seizure raids at premises where infringing goods are believed to be sold or manufactured, seize the offending stock, and prepare an inventory for the court. In copyright piracy cases involving websites, similar orders are used to direct internet service providers to block access to infringing sites, sometimes extending dynamically to 'mirror' or replacement sites that emerge later.
Practical Considerations for Rights Holders
A John Doe order is an extraordinary, ex parte remedy, so courts expect a strong prima facie case and genuine urgency: typically timed around events like a film release or a seasonal counterfeiting surge. Rights holders should be ready to move quickly once the order is granted, work closely with the appointed Local Commissioner, and follow through with confirmation proceedings once specific defendants are identified from the raid.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a 'John Doe' order in Indian law?
An interim injunction granted against unnamed, unidentified defendants described by their infringing conduct (such as anyone selling counterfeit goods bearing a specific mark) allowing enforcement against parties identified later through a raid.
Why is it sometimes called an 'Ashok Kumar' order in India?
Indian courts adopted the English 'John Doe' concept using the Indian placeholder name 'Ashok Kumar' for an unidentified defendant, and the term has stuck in Indian anti-piracy practice.
Can this kind of order be used to block pirated content online?
Yes. Courts have extended John Doe-style orders to direct internet service providers to block access to websites streaming or hosting pirated content, sometimes with provisions covering future mirror sites.
Is a John Doe order a final finding of infringement?
No. It is an interim, ex parte remedy enabling enforcement action such as a raid: actual liability of any specific party identified through the raid is still determined through the ordinary course of the suit.
References & Further Reading
This article references the following statutory provisions. Readers should always verify current rules, fees and timelines against the applicable statute and rules as amended, since these are revised from time to time.
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Order XXXIX (temporary injunctions) as applied to unnamed-defendant relief.
- Copyright Act, 1957 and Trade Marks Act, 1999 (underlying causes of action enforced through such orders).