दिल्ली हाई कोर्ट में व्यक्तित्व अधिकार की परिभाषा पर सुनवाई

“I want to chip off what I consider is not personality right. Whatever remains, remains,” Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani of the Delhi High Court said on September 28, according to Bar & Bench.

The Delhi High Court will hear three personality rights suits together to decide what the right covers. Actors Vivek Oberoi and Janhvi Kapoor, and Amitabh Bachchan’s granddaughter Aaradhya Bachchan, filed the suits. The court will begin hearing them on September 30.

Justice Bhambhani explained how the court would define personality rights:

“The way I look at it is that there is this monolithic block of clay or wood in front of me that makes no sense to me. I don’t discern any design or image⦠Subsequently other matters may come up, that would require the court chip off further part so that ultimately some kind of a definitive face emerges saying that this is what personality rights is about.”

Should fans be banned?

The court questioned why claimants want it to take down fan accounts. “Should we ban all fans? Nobody should have any fans. There will be no fan, then no problem. No celebrity should have any fan clubs or fan accounts,” it remarked.

The court has turned down such requests before. In August, it refused a blanket takedown of fan pages in Janhvi and Khushi Kapoor’s suits, saying such an order could affect free speech. “It is going out of hand. Started with something small, done with all good intentions. Now we are sitting at 6884 URLs,” Justice Bhambhani said.

Six suits on hold: Suits by Senior Advocate Vikas Pahwa, Akira Desai, Acharya Balkrishna, Anil Kumar Tiwari, Anirudhacharya, actor Allu Arjun and actor Meenakshi Chaudhary also came up on September 28. The court said taking up a large batch would complicate adjudication and will take up these suits later.

Same rules for everyone?

The court put this question to advocates Gautam Bhatia and Rohan Alva, whom it appointed as amici curiae. Amici curiae are independent lawyers who assist the court on legal questions without representing either side. “There are celebrities, influencers, and a senior counsel. Are the issues going to be common, or would different people be treated differently?” the court asked.

Bhatia said it depends on the claim. “If it is a commercial interest which is based in propriety rights of an individual, then recognisability will matter, since it is an abuse of the commercial aspect of their image. But if it is founded in the right to privacy, defamation or dignity, then those will be uniform,” he said.

“There are certain aspects of personality which fall into different brackets, which is the first thing Lordship may examine,” Alva said.

Five questions the court could answer

MediaNama found five questions that recur in personality rights cases this year.

- Monetisation: Must a claimant prove someone made money from their persona? “You have to show me that they are making money,” Justice Bhambhani said in Meenakshi Chaudhary’s suit, where he declined a blanket injunction.

- Sexually explicit content: Courts have consistently ordered platforms to take down pornographic deepfakes, including in Chaudhary’s suit.

- Impersonation: Courts have removed accounts that mimic a claimant, but have resisted bulk takedowns of fan pages.

- Satire: Courts have protected parody and political commentary. “Where do we draw the line is all I am asking,” Justice Bhambhani said.

- Who qualifies: In the Aaradhya Bachchan case, he said “the concept of personality rights is acquiring amoebic proportions”. He asked whether courts could treat fake news and defamation as intellectual property violations.

New suits keep coming

Celebrities continue to approach courts. On September 22, actor Manoj Bajpayee moved the Delhi High Court against AI voice generators, deepfakes and merchandise that use his name, seeking Rs 2 crore in damages. On September 4, the Bombay High Court ordered platforms to take down deepfakes and sexually explicit synthetic content involving actor Shruti Haasan.

Why it matters: India has no law that defines personality rights, so courts decide each case on its own. Many of these cases have ended in broad orders directing platforms to remove content, and results have varied from one judge and claimant to the next. By hearing these three suits together, the Delhi High Court can set one standard for what personality rights protect. That standard will decide what platforms must take down and what fans, satirists and critics can keep posting about public figures.

Running tracker of personality rights cases:

- November 2022 â Amitabh Bachchan: The Delhi High Court restrained the unauthorised use of Bachchanâs name, image and voice, and ordered blocking of websites linked to fraudulent lottery scams.

- May 2023 â Rario: The Delhi High Court refused an interim injunction against fantasy sports platforms, holding that the platform could not claim exclusive rights over publicly available statistics.

- September 2023 â Anil Kapoor: The Delhi High Court restrained unauthorised use of Kapoorâs name, image, voice and likeness, including through AI, deepfakes and face morphing.

- May 2024 â Jackie Shroff: The Delhi High Court restrained unauthorised commercial use of Shroffâs name, voice, image and other personality attributes, including through AI.

- June 2024 â Rajat Sharma: The Delhi High Court restrained unauthorised use of Sharmaâs name, photograph and likeness, along with the âAap Ki Adalatâ trademark.

- June 2024 â Karan Johar: The Bombay High Court restrained the release and promotion of Shaadi Ke Director Karan Aur Johar over its unauthorised use of Joharâs name.

- August 2024 â Arijit Singh: The Bombay High Court restrained unauthorised use of Singhâs name, voice, image and likeness, including through AI-generated and synthetic voices.

- June 2025 â Sadhguru: The Delhi High Court restrained unauthorised use of Sadhguruâs name, voice, image and likeness, including through AI and deepfakes.

- July 2025 â Sonu Nigam: The Bombay High Court directed a Bihar lawyer named Sonu Nigam Singh to display his full name on X after the singer alleged impersonation.

- September 2025 â Karan Johar, Aishwarya Rai Bachchan and Abhishek Bachchan: The Delhi High Court protected their personality rights and restrained unauthorised use of their names, images, voices and likenesses, including through AI and deepfakes in two separate cases.

- September 2025 â Nagarjuna: The Delhi High Court restrained unauthorised use of Nagarjunaâs name, image, voice and likeness, including through AI and deepfakes.

- October 2025 â Asha Bhosle: The Bombay High Court restrained unauthorised use of Bhosleâs name, image and voice, including replicating her voice through AI tools.

- November 2025 â Raj Shamani: The Delhi High Court protected the podcasterâs personality rights through an order against unidentified defendants.

- January 2026 â Akira Nandan: The Delhi High Court protected Nandan, Pawan Kalyanâs son, against unauthorised AI-generated content using his identity.

- February 2026 â Baba Ramdev: The Delhi High Court restrained unauthorised use of Ramdevâs name, image and voice, including through AI-generated deepfakes.

- February 2026 â Vivek Oberoi: The Delhi High Court restrained misuse of Oberoiâs name, image, voice and likeness through AI and other digital technologies.

- March 2026 â Shilpa Shetty: The Bombay High Court protected Shettyâs personality rights and ordered takedown of AI-generated deepfakes and other infringing content.

- April 2026 â Toprankers Edtech: The Delhi High Court held that a single academic achievement does not confer personality rights, but restrained the use of the CLAT 2026 topperâs name and images on defamation and trademark grounds.

- May 2026 â Allu Arjun: The Delhi High Court restrained unauthorised commercial use of Arjunâs name, image, voice and other distinctive attributes, including through AI and deepfakes.

- May 2026 â Shashi Tharoor: The Delhi High Court ordered removal of identified deepfake content falsely depicting Tharoor as praising Pakistan.

- May 2026 â Aman Gupta: The Delhi High Court protected Guptaâs personality rights against unauthorised use of his name, image, voice and likeness, including AI-generated deepfakes.

- May 2026 â Raghav Chadha: The Delhi High Court refused a blanket takedown order, holding that criticism of Chadhaâs political decisions was protected speech, while ordering removal of certain obscene content.

- June 2026 â Varun Dhawan: The Delhi High Court restrained unauthorised use of Dhawanâs personality and ordered takedown of AI-generated, pornographic and other infringing content.

- July 2026 â Preity Zinta: The Bombay High Court granted Zinta interim protection against AI-generated deepfakes, morphed images, chatbots and unauthorised merchandise.

- July 2026 â Abhishek Sharma: The Delhi High Court initially put off relief over missing evidence before granting protection against unauthorised AI and deepfake content.

- July 2026 â Ravi Kishan: The Delhi High Court protected Kishanâs personality rights and ordered removal of AI-generated, obscene and pornographic content.

- July 2026 â Salman Khan: The Delhi High Court ordered removal of material promoting Kala Hiran, finding that it made identifiable references to Khan.

- August 2026 â Nitin Gadkari: The Bombay High Court ordered takedown of AI-generated videos falsely linking Gadkari to the E20 ethanol-blending policy.

- August 2026 â Alakh Pandey: The Delhi High Court ordered removal of vulgar and commercially exploitative content involving Pandey, while distinguishing legitimate parody from commercial exploitation.

- August 2026 â Janhvi Kapoor and Khushi Kapoor: The Delhi High Court ordered removal of specified obscene, pornographic and AI-generated content, but refused Janhvi Kapoorâs request for a blanket takedown of thousands of web addresses.

- August 2026 â Sukhpal Singh Khaira: A Chandigarh district court directed Meta to remove an AI-generated and morphed video depicting Khaira in womenâs clothing.

- August 2026 â Aaradhya Bachchan: The Delhi High Court said the concept of personality rights was acquiring amoebic proportions while hearing the case.

- August 2026 â Acharya Balkrishna: The Delhi High Court protected Balkrishnaâs personality rights against unauthorised commercial use, including AI-generated and manipulated content.

- August 2026 â Jaya Bachchan: The Delhi High Court continued protection of Bachchanâs personality rights while maintaining its position on sellers of movie posters. The court said those rights lie with the producer.

- September 2026 â Shruti Haasan: The Bombay High Court ordered takedown of AI deepfakes, sexually explicit content and unauthorised merchandise, finding a âvery strong prima facie caseâ.

- September 2026 â Meenakshi Chaudhary: The Delhi High Court restrained sexually explicit content, but left claims of commercial exploitation open pending evidence that anyone monetised her personality.

- September 2026 â Manoj Bajpayee: Bajpayee moved the Delhi High Court against AI voice generators, deepfakes and merchandise using his name, and sought Rs 2 crore in damages.

MediaNama will follow the hearings from September 30. Stay tuned for what the court decides.

Also read:

- Can Personality Rights & the DPDP Act Protect âViral Celebritiesâ from Deepfakes?

- Inconsistent Moderation of Metaâs Instagram AI Avatars Raises Privacy and personality Rights Concerns

For You

- Read Reasoned by Nikhil Pahwa: How AI is changing our world

- Sign up for MediaNama's Daily Newsletter to receive regular updates

- Sponsor a MediaNama Event

Powered by Nyaya 247 News