Enforcement of celebrity and personality rights has witnessed a marked upswing in India over the last decade, particularly between 2022 to 2025, driven by high-profile litigation and the rise of AI-enabled misuse of identity. The Delhi High Court has increasingly become the preferred forum for celebrities seeking urgent injunctions against unauthorised use of their name, image, voice, catchphrases, and AI-generated replicas of their personality in deep-fake videos, advertisements, etc. Recent proceedings by Amitabh Bachchan, Abhishek Bachchan, Aishwarya Rai Bachchan, Anil Kapoor, Jackie Shroff, and Asha Bhosle have resulted in a broad range of interim orders restraining the use and misuse of their respective personality across different media, including social media. The absence of a statutory framework for the protection of personality rights has not dissuaded the Indian Courts from granting robust remedies to the litigants before them. This trend reflects both heightened awareness among the celebrities about the commercial and reputational value of their persona and judicial willingness to treat personality rights as a part of the constitutional right to privacy and dignity under Article 21.
Alongside civil suits, regulatory scrutiny of endorsements under the Consumer Protection Act and advertising guidelines has also intensified, with the consumer fora holding celebrities to a higher standard of accountability for misleading promotions, thereby reinforcing the discipline around commercial use of the celebrity identity. As deepfakes, AI–morphed images, and viral digital exploitation have become more frequent, the enforcement of celebrity rights has moved from being a nice issue under the IPR regime to a mainstream tool for reputation management and digital harm prevention, contributing to a wider public debate on the need for clearer, codified publicity and personality rights in India's digital age.
The recent controversy involving Marathi actor Girija Oak, in which her authentic image went viral and was later manipulated into AI-generated obscene photos, has dramatically highlighted the dark side of celebrity in the digital era. Oka openly expressed her distress through social media, emphasising how such technology enables exploitation, strips away a person's dignity and sense of security. She voiced a concern about the perpetual nature of such images on the internet, noting the fear and anxiety it causes not just for herself, but for her family as well, particularly their child, who may encounter their manipulated images in the future.
This incident demonstrates the gaps in the current protective frameworks. Oak's case has generated widespread debate about the urgent need for stronger legal, regulatory, and social measures to address the rapidly evolving risks associated with AI, deepfakes, and viral online abuse.
Celebrity rights and personality rights empower individuals to control the commercial use of traits that make them recognizable, such as name, image, voice, likeness, signature, and gestures. These are crucial in preventing the unauthorized exploitation of a person's identity for commercial or misleading purposes. While “celebrity rights” specifically refer to well-known personalities whose identity holds commercial value, “personality rights” apply more broadly, providing any person with the legal means to safeguard their persona against misuse in advertising and media.
In India, the recognition of personality and celebrity rights has evolved mainly through judicial decisions, rather than comprehensive legislation. The Judgment of the Supreme Court of India in R. Rajahopal v. State of Tamil Nadu[1], commonly referred to as the “Auto Shankar case”, was the pivotal decision in the evolution of the right to privacy and personality rights in India. The case involved an issue wherein the State was attempting to restrain the publication of a prisoner's autobiography on grounds of privacy and defamation. The Supreme Court recognized the right to privacy, while not expressly provided for in the Constitution, as implicit within Article 21. This decision established that individuals possess the fundamental right to protect their private lives from publicity or defamation, even when balanced against the freedom of the press.
The Auto Shankar case laid the foundation for the protection of various aspects of personality, including control over one's image, reputation, and personal narrative, to both private citizens and public figures. The judgment clarified that the press and media could publish factual information obtained from public records without consent, but publication beyond that scope could amount to an invasion of privacy if it was unauthorized or disparaging.
A 9-Judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court of India further entrenched the right to privacy as intrinsic to the right of life and liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution in K. S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India.[2] Article 21, as interpreted by the Supreme Court of India, now includes reputation, dignity, and pertinently, control over all personal traits, viz. voice, catchphrases, and digital likeness, or even more nuanced personality features.
Indian Courts have protected the proprietary aspects, recognizing not only commercial interests for celebrities, but also the dignity and autonomy of individuals in the digital age. For instance, in Amitabh Bachchan v. Rajat Nagi & Ors., the Delhi High Court granted the actor interim relief, restraining the unauthorised use of his name, image, voice and likeness for advertisements and merchandise. Similarly, the Bombay High Court recently reinforced personality rights by granting relief to filmmaker Karan Johar against the producers of a film that used his name and persona in the title and promotional materials.
In the context of AI-generated content, the decision of the Bombay High Court in Arijit Singh v. Codible Ventures LLP[3] established a legal precedent for the protection of personality rights. Arijit Singh is the first Indian judgment to address the misuse of generative AI tools. The Bombay High Court, speaking through Justice R. I Chagla, expressed shock in regards to the manner in which celebrities are vulnerable to being targeted by unauthorised generative AI content. It further observed that the AI emboldened internet users to create counterfeit sound recordings and videos that misuse the celebrity's character and identity. The High Court held that creation of new audio or video content/songs/videos in the Plaintiff's AI name/voice, photograph, image, likeness and persona without his consent and commercially using the same could potentially jeopardise the Plaintiff's career/livelihood. Furthermore, the High Court held that allowing the Defendants to continue using the Plaintiff's name, voice, likeness etc. in the form of an AI content, without consent of the Plaintiff, not only risks severe economic harm to the Plaintiff's life/career, but also leaves room for opportunities for misutilization of such tools by unscrupulous individuals for nefarious purposes.
On 26.08.2025[4], the Delhi High Court granted spiritual leader Sri Sri Ravi Shankar interim protection against the unauthorised creation and circulation of deepfake and AI-generated content using his identity. The order was in response to a widespread emergency of fabricated videos that misrepresented him as endorsing questionable health remedies and making false scientific claims. The Delhi High Court restrained unidentified parties from using the spiritual leader's name, voice, image, likeness, unique style of speech and delivery, or any identifiable attributes in any medium, including AI – generated contents, deepfake videos, voice clone audio, and even in future digital formats. The High Court directed Meta Platforms to remove the infringing content within 36 hours. The interim order of the Delhi High Court also sets a strong precedent for the judicial protection of personality rights in the age of AI and deepfakes, affirming not only celebrity and commercial interests, but also the dignity and autonomy of public figures.
The enforcement of celebrity and personality rights in India is rapidly evolving into a powerful instrument for protecting the individual dignity, commercial value, and digital reputation in a rapidly changing technological landscape. Judicial decisions have filled up the legislative void. The judicial pronouncements mentioned hereinabove, and many others, have addressed cutting-edge challenges such as AI – generated deepfakes and voice cloning to ensure robust, immediate protection for both celebrities and ordinary individuals. As cases like Girija Oak's continue to highlight the existing gaps, there is now an urgent societal and legal consensus for a codified framework dedicated to celebrity and personality rights. This will offer greater certainty and deterrence and foster a more responsible, ethical and accountable digital ecosystem for all.
Author is Standing Counsel for the State of Goa, Supreme Court of India. Views Are Personal.