Justice P.B. Bajanthri, 46th Chief Justice of Patna High Court, retires after a tenure of 1 month
Justice Pavankumar Bhimappa Bajanthri was appointed as Chief Justice of Patna High Court in September 2025.
Justice Pavankumar Bhimappa Bajanthri was appointed as Chief Justice of Patna High Court in September 2025.
“Both in the context of images and videos, the morphing is so sophisticated and deceptive that it is virtually impossible to discern that the same are not genuine images/videos of the Akshya Kumar.”
This article explains the concept of personality rights and how a surge in celebrity lawsuits is reshaping the law on identity, privacy, and digital misuse in India.
Defendant 1 was circulating AI-generated images/ deepfakes falsely depicting Suniel Shetty and his family members in obscene and salacious manner on various social media platforms.
“Defendant 1 is circulating fabricated videos of Ravi Shankar on Facebook and on other independent websites, utilizing advanced AI technologies, including ‘deepfake’ tools, to digitally impersonate the plaintiff’s voice, facial expressions, persona and likeness, thereby creating a false impression amongst the world at large that Ravi Shankar is personally speaking, endorsing or promoting the content therein.”
“The depiction of the Akkineni Nagarjuna in settings that are misleading, derogatory and inappropriate will inevitably have the effect of diluting the goodwill and reputation associated with him.”
“Given the commercial value of these publicity rights, a celebrity is entitled to safeguard his interest against any misuse of the personality attributes which includes his name, image, voice and likeness.”
This order is in line with the 9-9-2025 order favoring Aishwarya Rai Bachchan, who had filed a similar petition seeking identical reliefs.
“Sonu Nigam Singh’s actions could not be considered innocent, and the misrepresentation caused among members of the general public was not a matter of coincidence and thus his conduct was ex facie dishonest and reeked of mala fide.”
It is the case of the plaintiff that an unknown person/person, arraigned in the suit as Defendant 2 has started a YouTube channel under the name of ‘@AnajanaomKashya’
The Court observed that many accounts on YouTube channels and Meta’s social media platforms are using modern day technology to modify the voice, image, likeness etc. of Sadhguru to garner more views and subscribers to piggyback on his name and reputation.
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.
“Merely because the Central Board of Film Certification (‘CBFC’) certificate is obtained for the film, the same does not restrict the applicant’s right to take action against the film for violation of his rights.”
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.
It is submitted that Plaintiff 1 is a ‘celebrity’ and has a valid and enforceable personality right. He satisfies the dual test of personality rights, viz. having a valid and enforceable personality right on account of being a well-known reputed personality and the same is clearly identifiable in the infringing content uploaded by Defendants 1-8 and 13 on their social media accounts.
Making AI tools available that enable conversion of any voice into that of a celebrity without their permission constitutes a violation of their personality rights and such tools facilitate unauthorized appropriation and manipulation of a celebrity’s voice, which is a key component of their personal identity and public persona.
Independent News Service Private Limited was incorporated in the year 1997 by its Chairman and Editor-in-Chief, Rajat Sharma and got the permission from the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government to uplink its 24 hours Hindi News channel called INDIA TV.
The article on the websites describes a fake/made-up interview from the actual Interview of Mr. Ambani with Mr. Anand Narasimhan, a senior anchor and Managing Editor at CNN-News18 uploaded on Network 18 Media and Investments Limited, Youtube Channel.
The Court sought response from a content creator for a YouTube video titled “Jackie Shroff Is Savage (*) Jackie Shroff Thug Life” and viewed that restricting such creative expressions stifles freedom of expression, potentially deterring the public from exercising their right to free speech due to fear of legal repercussions.
by Dr Pratima Narayan*