Bombay High Court Protects Personality Rights: Restrains Unauthorized Use of Celebrity Name on Social Media - 2026-06-02

Digital Identity Theft: Bombay HC Curbs Impersonation of Singer Sonu Nigam on ‘X’

In a significant legal intervention concerning the digital footprint of celebrities, the Bombay High Court has issued an ex-parte ad-interim injunction against an individual for impersonating renowned playback singer Sonu Nigam on the social media platform ‘X’.

Justice R.I. Chagla, presiding over the Commercial Division, ruled that the defendant’s systematic use of the singer’s name as a display name—while ostensibly hiding behind a handle including the name "Singh"—amounted to a clear case of misrepresentation and a violation of the plaintiff’s publicity rights.

The Conflict: A Case of Borrowed Identity

The dispute emerged when Sonu Nigam, a recipient of the Padma Shri and a three-decade veteran of the Indian music industry, discovered that a user was operating an account on ‘X’ (formerly Twitter) using the display name "Sonu Nigam."

The defendant, identifying as a criminal lawyer from Bihar, had garnered over 92,000 followers. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant was not only using his name but was also engaging in "calculated and systematic" impersonation. The court noted instances where the defendant posted inflammatory and politically divisive content, which led the public—and even major news outlets—to erroneously attribute these controversial views to the singer, thereby causing him irreparable mental and professional harm.

Arguments from the Bench and the Bar

Mr. Hiren Kamod, appearing for the plaintiff, argued that the defendant’s conduct crossed the line from personal expression into actionable infringement. He contended that the defendant’s refusal to clarify his identity, coupled with his engagement with users who clearly believed they were speaking to the singer, demonstrated blatant mala fides .

The court scrutinized instances where the defendant had responded to public inquiries, effectively stepping into the shoes of the singer to maintain the charade. "The conduct of the Defendant No. 1 is ex facie dishonest and reeks of mala fides," Justice Chagla observed, noting that the defendant intentionally maintained the display name to derive benefit from the plaintiff's established goodwill.

Legal Analysis: Personality Rights in the Digital Age

The court relied on the established principle that personality rights are distinct, protectable facets of an individual’s identity. Citing Arun Jaitley vs. Network Solutions Private Limited , the bench reaffirmed that the right to one’s own name is a personal right that stands on a higher footing than a mere commercial trademark.

Justice Chagla clarified that whilst freedom of speech under Article 19 is a fundamental right, it is not an unbridled license to infringe upon another's right to privacy and identity. The ruling establishes that even in the digital sphere, one cannot cloak their online presence in another person’s established persona to mislead the public.

Key Observations

• On the distinctiveness of the name: "Prima facie, I am of the view that by virtue of the tremendous goodwill and reputation of the Plaintiff as a public figure and celebrated artist / performer, the Plaintiff’s stage name 'Sonu Nigam' per se, which is also his personal name, has become distinctive of the Plaintiff and has achieved the significance of a trade mark."
• On the deceptive conduct: "The Defendant No. 1 is indeed using the Plaintiff’s distinctive stage name / mark 'Sonu Nigam' as the display name… the Defendant No. 1 is egregiously exploiting the Plaintiff’s personality traits, especially his name, so as to actively as well as passively misrepresent to the general public that he is the Plaintiff."
• On the necessity of the injunction: "In my view, even though the Plaintiff is a celebrity, as a citizen of this country the Plaintiff is entitled to safeguard the privacy of his own and his family and to prevent the publication of any content in the media / social media which violates this right."

The Verdict: A Balanced Restraint

The Bombay High Court’s order acts as a shield for public figures against the rising tide of digital impersonation. The court has restrained the defendant from using the display name "Sonu Nigam" per se. Crucially, the order is nuanced: it allows the defendant to continue using his full name, "Sonu Nigam Singh," provided it does not lead to public deception.

This decision reinforces the precedent that while names may be shared, the unauthorized appropriation of a celebrity’s specific online identity to cause public confusion and reputational damage will be met with strict legal scrutiny. The matter is set for further consideration on August 4, 2025.