Did Sachet-Parampara really commit plagiarism in ‘Raanjhan’?

KMKZ made the allegation, Sachet-Parampara said – We will file a defamation case.

The beginning of the allegations

Ever since the song “Raanjhan” from Kriti Sanon’s film Do Patti was released, the track has been on the first line of every playlist.

But this week, suddenly, international music producer KMKZ accused T-Series and composer duo Sachet-Parampara of using his beats without his permission.

Fans were shocked to hear this claim and a debate started on social media.

What did KMKZ say?

KMKZ said that he sells beats online and about two years ago, he posted one of his piano compositions on YouTube.

Then he got a message saying that the same piano sequence is in “Raanjhan”, but neither did he get credit nor payment.

“I mailed T-Series, mailed the artist, but got no response,” KMKZ said in an Instagram video.

Seeing more than 290 million streams on Spotify, he felt that his hard work was not respected at all.

Sachet-Parampara’s strong reply

Parampara Thakur clarified the controversy in an interview with Mid-Day.

He said that these allegations are lies made in the desire for “unnecessary popularity”. He said that

• He has sent his original music files and piano notation to YouTube, Spotify and other platforms.
• Chords like F♯, E♭m and D♭ in the F♯ major scale are generic and can be used by composers around the world.
• When major platforms reviewed his original files, KMKZ’s request was rejected.

Preparation for “Defamation Case”

Parampara made it clear that these allegations are not his misunderstanding or deception, but a deliberate attempt to tarnish the composition of his song.

“Our lawyer has filed a case in court. We will pursue a defamation suit because such false claims harm our real hours of hard work and reputation in the industry,” he said firmly.

Chords and creativity

Sachet-Parampara argues that chord progressions are not patentable.

When you are creating a melody on the F♯ major scale, the same chord transitions are likely to be used by many creators.

So, mere similarity of chords cannot be termed as plagiarism.

Conclusion

This dispute shows how important it is to protect both creativity and credit in today’s digital age.

KMKZ should also communicate with its payers, wait for the platforms to review, and take the legal route—as Sachet-Parampara has done.

Transparency and honesty are what make the difference in complex cases, and this dispute will likely end up in the courtroom.