In a landmark ruling aimed at protecting brands from online impersonation and fraud, the Delhi High Court has introduced comprehensive guidelines to regulate misuse of domain names.

The directions were issued in the matter of Dabur India Limited v Ashok Kumar and Ors, where fraudulent domain registrations were allegedly used to impersonate established brands and mislead the public.

Background of the Case

Several trademark owners approached the court after discovering that unknown individuals had registered domain names identical or deceptively similar to their brand names. These domains were allegedly used to:

• Impersonate legitimate companies

• Offer fake employment opportunities

• Circulate misleading information

• Sell counterfeit or misrepresented products and services

Investigations revealed that many of these registrations were backed by unverified information, temporary mobile numbers, and email IDs created through public internet facilities. In some cases, the registrations appeared to originate from outside India, and associated bank accounts were opened using inaccurate or fabricated details.

The court observed that anonymity and privacy protections claimed by Domain Name Registrars (DNRs) were creating serious challenges in identifying the individuals behind such frauds. Financial losses in these cases were reported to run into millions of rupees.

Key Directions Issued by the Court

Mandatory e-KYC and Verification

The court directed DNRs to:

• Collect complete and accurate details of domain registrants

• Conduct electronic Know-Your-Customer (e-KYC) verification

• Periodically re-verify registrant information

This measure aims to prevent fake or anonymous registrations.

Limited Privacy Protection

Registrars and registry operators cannot withhold registrant details from investigative authorities by citing privacy protections.

Privacy services must no longer be provided automatically. Instead, registrants may opt for privacy only upon payment of an additional service fee. Moreover, registrars must provide registrant details within 72 hours of a lawful request.

Appointment of Grievance Officers

All DNRs operating in India are required to:

• Appoint a grievance officer within one month

• Publish their contact details publicly

• Facilitate timely responses to lawful communications

The court clarified that service of notices, including court orders sent to the grievance officer’s email or the registrant’s registered email address, shall be considered valid. Registrars can no longer insist that communications must be routed through the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) process.

Permanent Blocking of Fraudulent Domains

If a domain name is found to have been used for unlawful purposes, it must be permanently blocked, preventing future re-registration.

Additionally, courts may direct that infringing domains be transferred to the rightful trademark owner upon payment of standard charges.

Broader Institutional Coordination

For effective enforcement, the court indicated that directions may involve several regulatory and digital authorities, including:

• Reserve Bank of India

• Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers

• Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology

• National Payments Corporation of India

Banks have been directed to implement a “beneficiary bank account name lookup” facility for online payments to help reduce financial fraud linked to deceptive domain usage.

Stronger Protection for Trademark Owners

The court held that:

• Injunctions will apply not only to the specific infringing domain but also to similar variations.

• Registrars must not suggest alternative infringing domain names to prospective registrants.

• Non-compliant registrars risk losing safe harbour protection under applicable law.

• Search engines and registrars must not promote or provide optimization services to infringing domains.

Registry operators holding valid ICANN agreements are also required to implement Trademark Clearing House services, enabling brand owners to better safeguard their trademarks during domain registrations.

Government’s Role

The Government of India has been directed to:

• Conduct stakeholder consultations

• Explore a structured regulatory framework for domain registrations

• Consider establishing a nodal agency

• Block non-compliant domain registrars

• Coordinate with ICANN to ensure Indian brand owners can access Trademark Clearing House mechanisms

Relief Granted in the Dabur Case

The court extended protection to the Dabur trademark and ordered the removal of infringing websites associated with fraudulent activities.

Significance of the Judgment

This ruling establishes one of the most detailed judicial frameworks in India addressing domain name misuse and online brand impersonation. By mandating stronger verification, limiting blanket privacy protections, and involving financial and regulatory authorities, the court has significantly strengthened brand protection and consumer safeguards in the digital ecosystem.

For businesses operating online, the message is clear: domain compliance, verification, and brand protection mechanisms will now face stricter scrutiny under Indian law.