Operation Sindoor

Operation Sindoor’ Trademark Bids Rejected Amid Public Backlash and Legal Concerns

by

In a significant move, the Indian government has rejected multiple trademark applications filed for the term “Operation Sindoor”. These applications, submitted shortly after India’s cross-border military action in May 2025, sparked widespread public outrage and legal scrutiny.

🔺 Background: What Is Operation Sindoor?

Operation Sindoor refers to a military operation launched by India on May 7, 2025, targeting terror camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. The action came after the deadly Pahalgam terror attack, which killed 26 people, including security personnel and civilians.

The codename quickly became a symbol of national pride and military valor. However, its use in trademark filings triggered criticism for trying to commercialize a sensitive national event.

Learn more about India’s military operations.

📝 Trademark Race Begins

On the same day as the operation, at least four trademark applications for “Operation Sindoor” were filed with the Indian Trademark Registry under Class 41. This class includes services such as film production, education, and entertainment.

The applicants included:

  • Reliance Industries (Jio Studios)
  • A retired Air Force officer
  • A Mumbai-based lawyer
  • An individual from the entertainment industry

Class 41 under Indian Trademark Law

🛑 Reliance Withdraws Application

Facing public outrage, Reliance Industries swiftly withdrew its application. On May 8, 2025, the company clarified that the filing was inadvertent and made by a junior employee without authorization.

“Reliance has no intention to use or commercialize a term that reflects the courage and sacrifice of our armed forces,” the company said in a public statement.

Read the full Reliance withdrawal statement here.

⚖️ Government Rejects All Applications

On August 1, 2025, the Commerce and Industry Ministry confirmed in the Rajya Sabha that all applications related to “Operation Sindoor” were formally rejected.

This decision was based on:

  • Section 9(2)(b) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, which bars marks that offend public sentiment
  • The Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950, which prohibits using military names for private gains

View the Trade Marks Act, 1999
View the Emblems and Names Act, 1950

🔊 Public and Legal Reactions

The trademark filings led to a strong backlash from civil society, legal experts, and political leaders.

  • Many labeled the act as “moment trademarking”—a trend where individuals or companies rush to claim terms from national events.
  • Legal experts warned this could set a dangerous precedent and harm the dignity of national operations.
  • A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed in the Supreme Court, demanding that such terms be barred from commercial registration permanently.

Read more on India’s trademark ethics debate.

📌 What the Law Says

Indian Trademark Law prevents:

  • Use of marks that hurt public order or morality
  • Misleading names that imply government endorsement
  • Registration of military or national symbols

Global Perspective:

Other countries like the US and UK also have provisions barring the trademarking of government or military-related terms.

Explore India’s IPR regime
Compare with US Trademark Law (USPTO)

🔍 What’s Next?

  • All “Operation Sindoor” trademark applications have been officially canceled.
  • The Supreme Court may decide on broader legal safeguards to prevent future misuse of national phrases.
  • Industry experts call for clearer IP policy reforms to address ethical concerns in trademark registration.

📈 SEO Summary

Keywords: Operation Sindoor, Trademark Rejected, Reliance Industries, India Military Operation, Trademark Law India, Public Interest Litigation, Trade Marks Act 1999, National Symbol Trademark

Conclusion:
The rejection of the “Operation Sindoor” trademark filings sends a clear message: national identity is not for sale. As India navigates the complex balance between intellectual property rights and public sentiment, this case may well shape future IP policy.

PIL Filed in Supreme Court Against Trademarking of “Operation Sindoor”

by

A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed in the Supreme Court of India challenging attempts to trademark the term “Operation Sindoor,” which is associated with India’s recent cross-border military strike targeting terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan. The plea, filed by advocate Dev Ashish Dubey, contends that the term should remain in the public domain as a symbol of national sacrifice and military valor, and must not be subject to commercial exploitation.

Symbol of National Mourning and Valor

“Operation Sindoor” was the code name attributed to a high-profile military operation carried out in April 2025 following a series of terrorist attacks on Indian soil. The operation garnered widespread national attention and has since become emblematic of India’s counter-terrorism resolve. According to the petitioner, the term has deep emotional and patriotic significance, representing both the grief of the nation and the courage of its armed forces.

Dubey argued in his petition that allowing the term to be trademarked for commercial purposes—particularly for use in entertainment and educational services—would undermine its solemnity. “This term is now a part of national memory,” the plea states. “To commercialize it is to trivialize the sacrifices of the martyrs and disrespect the sentiments of their families.”

Corporate Involvement and Controversy

Among them was an application by Mukesh Ambani-led Reliance Industries Limited (RIL), which had applied for the trademark under Class 41, covering services related to media, education, and entertainment.

In a public statement, the conglomerate clarified that the filing was made “without proper authorization” by a junior employee and was promptly retracted upon internal review.

Despite the withdrawal, the PIL notes that other private entities have also submitted trademark applications for the term, raising concerns about potential misuse in films, web series, and other commercial content.

Legal Arguments

The petition invokes Section 9 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, which prohibits the registration of terms that are likely to hurt public sentiment or are devoid of distinctive character in the commercial sense. Dubey’s plea argues that “Operation Sindoor” falls within this exception due to its symbolic association with a national tragedy and its lack of commercial originality.

“This is not a brand name or an invented phrase,” Dubey said. “It is a descriptor of a solemn military campaign, and it belongs to the people of India, not to any corporate entity or private individual.”

Call for Judicial Intervention

The petitioner has urged the Supreme Court to direct the Registrar of Trademarks to reject any current or future applications seeking to register “Operation Sindoor” as a trademark. The PIL also seeks broader guidelines to prevent similar attempts to commercialize terms tied to national security or military actions.

However, legal experts suggest that the case could set a precedent regarding the ethical and legal limits of branding sensitive national events.

Public Reaction

The PIL has received support from several quarters, including veterans’ associations and civil society groups. Many believe that the term should be preserved as a collective symbol of national pride and not repurposed for profit.

With the Supreme Court expected to weigh in on the matter, the case is likely to spark a larger conversation around the commodification of national symbols and the need for legislative safeguards against such practices.