Personality Rights and Artificial Intelligence: The Bombay High Court Protects Bollywood Actor Suniel Shetty Against AI-Generated Deepfakes

Bombay High Court, 10 October 2025 – Suniel Shetty v. John Doe & Ors., Commercial IP Suit (L) No. 32130/2025

‍

1. Jurisdiction and Procedural Context

In a landmark ex parte interim order dated 10 October 2025, the High Court of Bombay (Commercial Division) granted extensive injunctive reliefs in favour of Indian actor Suniel Shetty, restraining the unauthorized creation and dissemination of AI-generated images, voice reproductions and deepfake content exploiting his persona without consent.

The case forms part of a growing line of Indian jurisprudence recognising and enforcing personality rights, notably following Anil Kapoor v. Simply Life India (Delhi High Court, 2023) and Asha Bhosle v. Mayk Inc. (Bombay High Court, 2025), as well as several recent actions involving Bollywood actors targeted by deepfakes.

The Plaintiff sought judicial protection of his fundamental rights to privacy and dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, his moral rights under the Copyright Act, 1957, and his personality and image rights against the commercial exploitation of his identity across digital platforms.

‍

2. Factual Background

The Plaintiff, a veteran actor with over three decades of experience and more than 100 films to his credit — including the iconic Hera Pheri and Main Hoon Na — demonstrated a high degree of public recognition and digital presence, with millions of followers across Instagram, Facebook, X (formerly Twitter), and LinkedIn.

He alleged that multiple online entities had engaged in systematic and unauthorized exploitation of his image and reputation, through:

• the creation and circulation of AI-generated images and deepfakes, some depicting him and his family in obscene or defamatory ways;
• false endorsements associating him with gambling websites, astrology and numerology services, and real estate promotions;
• the sale of counterfeit merchandise bearing his name and likeness; and
• the creation of impersonating social media accounts on Meta and X Corp, misleading the public into believing they were authentic profiles.

The Plaintiff contended that these acts not only damaged his personal dignity and professional standing, but also misled consumers into believing he endorsed commercial ventures with which he had no association.

‍

3. Legal Basis of the Claim

The action combined constitutional, statutory, and common law principles, invoking:

• Article 21 of the Constitution of India, guaranteeing the right to privacy and dignity;
• Moral rights of authors under the Copyright Act, 1957;
• Personality rights and the right to control commercial use of one’s image and name, as recognised in Anil Kapoor, Jackie Shroff, and Karan Johar cases;
• Passing off and unfair competition, where the unauthorized use of a persona creates a false impression of endorsement; and
• The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, imposing a duty of diligence on social media intermediaries to prevent and remove false, misleading or impersonating content.

Represented by Dr. Birendra Saraf, Advocate General for Maharashtra, the Plaintiff argued that AI-based impersonation and digital replication represent a new form of misappropriation of goodwill, warranting urgent judicial intervention to prevent irreversible harm.

‍

4. Court’s Analysis

Justice Arif S. Doctor described the situation as a “lethal combination of a depraved mind and the misuse of technology,” observing that the deepfake content constituted a grave and unlawful intrusion upon the Plaintiff’s personality and privacy rights.

The Court held that:

• The creation and dissemination of AI-generated deepfakes of the Plaintiff and his family members violated the right to privacy and the right to live with dignity protected under Article 21;
• The commercial use of his name, voice, image and likeness without authorization amounted to misappropriation of personality rights and passing off;
• Such conduct deceives the public into believing in false affiliations or endorsements, constituting consumer deception and reputational harm;
• And finally, that social media intermediaries like Meta Platforms and X Corp have a positive duty to promptly act upon such violations in accordance with the 2021 IT Rules.

‍

5. The Order

The Bombay High Court granted a comprehensive ex parte interim injunction, including the following directions:

• Absolute restraint upon the named and unnamed defendants (John Doe/Ashok Kumar) from reproducing, imitating, manipulating, or exploiting any element of the Plaintiff’s personality — including his name, image, likeness, voice, signature, gestures, or distinctive mannerisms — whether through AI-generated content, deepfakes, voice cloning, or metaverse-based environments;
• Mandatory takedown orders against Meta and X Corp, requiring removal of all identified infringing content within one week and disclosure of subscriber and uploader details (including IP logs and payment data) to enable the Plaintiff to identify the infringers;
• Authorization of electronic service of process, in light of the number and anonymity of the defendants, with follow-up by postal service where possible;
• The matter was adjourned to 17 November 2025 for further hearing.

‍

6. Significance and Implications

This judgment marks a pivotal step in the evolution of personality rights protection in the era of artificial intelligence.

It affirms that AI-generated misuse of an individual’s image or voice constitutes a direct infringement of fundamental and commercial rights, actionable under constitutional, tort and IP frameworks.

The Court’s reasoning also reinforces the duty of online intermediaries to prevent and remedy identity-based infringements — extending liability principles traditionally applied in trademark and copyright contexts to AI-induced manipulations.

Beyond its individual impact, this decision confirms India’s position at the forefront of global judicial efforts to combat AI-based disinformation and identity theft, following a series of rulings protecting Bollywood actors and artists from deepfakes, voice cloning, and unauthorized digital endorsements.