From Asha Bhosle to Bachchans: Indian celebrities moving to court to protect personality rights from AI

Celebrities like Asha Bhosle, Aishwarya Rai Bachchan and Abhishek Bachchan have taken to courts to protect their personality rights

On Thursday, Bombay High Court provided playback legend Asha Bhosle immediate protection from the cloning of her voice and image, while Delhi High Court addressed submissions by actors Aishwarya Rai Bachchan and Abhishek Bachchan, who have sued Google due to AI-generated deepfake videos on YouTube seeking Rs 4 crore in damages.

Justice Arif S Doctor of the Bombay High Court prohibited AI firm Mayk Inc, online retailers Amazon and Flipkart, and YouTube from availing Bhosle's voice, images, and persona without her permission. He noted, "Making AI tools available to enable the conversion of any voice into that of a celebrity without his/her permission would constitute a violation of the celebrity's personality rights," according to Bar and Bench.

Reuters independently reported lawsuits by the Bachchans, over 1,500 pages long, charging Google with hosting "egregious", "sexually explicit" and "fictitious" AI videos depicting them in a false light. Their petitions cautioned, "Such content used to train AI models can have the effect of multiplying the number of use of any infringing content i.e. first being posted on YouTube getting viewed by the public, and then also getting used to train." The Delhi High Court has already ordered the removal of 518 infringing links and will hear the case again on January 15, 2026.

Indian celebrities approaching courts for personality rights

Courts have consistently granted injunctions, ordered takedowns, and enjoined disclosure of the information of infringing parties to protect the rights of celebrities. They have weighed these against freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a), allowing for parody, satire, criticism, art, and scholarship, but not commercial exploitation.

Justice Tejas Karia of Delhi High Court granted relief to actors Aishwarya Rai Bachchan and Abhishek Bachchan on September 9 and 10, after they flagged the misuse of their images and voices through AI-generated content and merchandise. Filmmaker Karan Johar also sought similar relief and Justice Manmeet PS Arora ordered to bar the unauthorised use of his persona through deepfakes, morphing, and other digital manipulation.

In May 2024, the Bombay High Court ruled in the case of singer Arijit Singh, who claimed that Codible Ventures LLP had made AI-generated copies of his voice. Justice RI Chagla stated, "What shocks the conscience of this court is the way in which celebrities, especially performers like the current Plaintiff, are susceptible to being targeted by unauthorised generative AI content."

Earlier in 2024, the Delhi High Court protected actor Jackie Shroff’s personality rights, restraining e-commerce platforms and AI chatbots from misusing his name, image, voice, and likeness without consent. The court noted that such misuse “dilutes the brand equity painstakingly built by the plaintiff over the years.”

In 2023, Anil Kapoor, an actor, was given wide protection by the Delhi High Court, restraining 16 online parties from using his name, image, voice, likeness, or his catchphrase "jhakaas." Justice Prathiba M Singh warned that use of this kind "which transcends the limit and leads to blackening, blackening or endangering the personality of the person as well as surrounding things, would be unlawful".

Also in 2023, the Delhi High Court in Digital Collectibles Pte Ltd v Galactus Funware Technology Pvt Ltd addressed the unauthorised use of images of sports stars. Justice Amit Bansal explained that use of celebrity names or images for "lampooning, satire, parodies, art, scholarship, music, academics, news and other similar uses" is a valid exercise of the Article 19(1)(a) right and cannot constitute infringement.

In 2010, in DM Entertainment Pvt Ltd v Baby Gift House, the Delhi High Court held that there were stores selling dolls copying singer Daler Mehndi. Granting an injunction, Justice S Ravindra Bhat cautioned that "an overemphasis on a famous person's publicity rights could chill free speech and deprive the public of an entire genre of expression."

In 2014, the Madras High Court reinforced the right of actor Rajinikanth to stop unauthorised commercial exploitation of his image in a case against the makers of the movie Main Hoon Rajnikanth, pointing out that infringement need not be proved as falsity, confusion, or deception if the celebrity is easily recognisable.

As reported by The Hindu, the jurisprudence of personality rights goes back to 1994, when the Supreme Court in R Rajagopal v State of Tamil Nadu recognised that people have a legitimate interest in regulating the use of their identity and based this protection on the constitutional right of privacy. The case arose when a magazine attempted to release the autobiography of death-row prisoner Auto Shankar, outlining his personal life and alleged connections with authorities, which the government attempted to restrain. The Court ruled that invasions of privacy should be remedied after publication through means such as defamation, and personal information already in the public domain can be published without permission.

What are personality rights?

Personality rights protect a person's name, likeness, image, voice, signature, and other unique characteristics from unauthorised commercial uses. Although not statutorily codified under a particular law, personality rights in India are rooted in common law principles of privacy, defamation, and publicity rights that are supported by judicial precedents.

Statutory protection is spread under intellectual property legislations. The Copyright Act, 1957 provides exclusive rights to performers under Section 38A and moral rights under Section 38B. The Trade Marks Act, 1999 allows persons, particularly celebrities, to register unique aspects of their persona as trademarks. The tort of passing off under Section 27 of the Trade Marks Act also safeguards goodwill by avoiding misappropriation through false endorsement.

At their root, personality rights are based on Article 21 of the Constitution, which promises the right to privacy, dignity, and autonomy.