New Delhi: In a significant setback for the newly merged media giant, the Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed a plea by JioStar Private Limited (formerly Star India) seeking to halt an investigation by the Competition Commission of India (CCI). The probe focuses on allegations of "abuse of dominant position" in the Kerala television broadcasting market.

The Bench, comprising Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice Sandeep Mehta, declined to interfere with the Kerala High Court's order, observing that the investigation is still at a preliminary stage and must be allowed to reach its logical conclusion.

The case originated from a complaint filed by Asianet Digital Network Limited (ADNPL), a digital TV service provider. Asianet alleged that JioStar was violating the Competition Act, 2002, by offering "discriminatory discounting payments" and preferential treatment to a rival operator, Kerala Communicators Cable Limited (KCCL).

According to the complaint, while TRAI regulations cap cumulative discounts at 35%, JioStar allegedly offered special discounts exceeding 50% to KCCL disguised as "promotional and advertisement payments." This preferential pricing reportedly allowed KCCL to undercut competitors, causing Asianet to lose a massive chunk of its subscriber base within months.

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for JioStar, argued that the company is regulated by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), which already fixes price caps and discount limits. He contended that the CCI should not investigate matters that fall under the domain of a sectoral regulator (TRAI), citing previous High Court precedents.

"Question is, can you investigate in relation to a matter covered by the sectoral regulator?" Rohatgi argued.

The Supreme Court, however, was unimpressed by the jurisdictional argument at this stage. Justice Pardiwala remarked:

"The investigation is at a preliminary stage... It needs to be looked into, Mr. Rohatgi."

By dismissing the Special Leave Petition (SLP), the Apex Court has effectively cleared the path for the CCI's Director General to probe whether JioStar's marketing agreements with KCCL were indeed anti-competitive strategies designed to kill competition in the Kerala market.

This ruling reinforces the CCI's jurisdiction even in sectors governed by specialized regulators like TRAI. For the media industry, especially after the massive consolidation of Star and Jio, it sends a warning signal: mere compliance with TRAI's pricing caps does not grant immunity from antitrust scrutiny if the underlying business practices are found to be exclusionary or predatory.