Bombay HC Shields Suniel Shetty’s Personality Rights Against AI Misuse in Expansive Interim Order

MUMBAI – The Bombay High Court has granted actor Suniel Shetty extensive interim protection for his personality rights, issuing a robust order against the unauthorized use of his name, image, and likeness, particularly through AI-generated deepfakes and false commercial endorsements. The decision, delivered by Justice Arif S. Doctor, marks a significant addition to the rapidly evolving jurisprudence on personality rights in India, reinforcing the judiciary's willingness to combat digital misuse and protect individual dignity in the age of artificial intelligence.

The court's order restrains a wide array of defendants, including a "John Doe/Ashok Kumar" defendant representing unknown infringers, from using Shetty's persona in any form without his consent. This includes deepfakes, cloned audio, unauthorized merchandise, and false advertising. The ruling not only underscores the commercial value of a celebrity's identity but also firmly grounds these protections in the fundamental rights to privacy and dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution.

The Core of the Suit: A "Lethal Combination" of Technology and Malice

Suniel Shetty approached the High Court citing widespread and egregious misuse of his identity across digital platforms. His plea, argued by Senior Advocate Dr. Birendra Saraf, detailed a litany of infringements, from real estate and gambling websites falsely claiming his endorsement to the sale of unauthorized merchandise featuring his image.

However, the most alarming evidence presented involved the use of sophisticated AI tools. Saraf submitted to the court deepfake images and videos depicting the actor in fabricated and often inappropriate situations. These included a doctored image of Shetty with his grandchild and another showing him in a suggestive setting with a well-known actress. Justice Doctor, taking a grim view of the material, described the actions as a "lethal combination of a depraved mind and the misuse of technology."

The court observed that such content posed a severe threat to Shetty's reputation and personal life. "The unauthorised creation/ uploading of deepfake images of the Plaintiff on social media platforms constitutes a grave infringement not only of his personality rights but also of his right to live with dignity," Justice Doctor stated in his order. "Equally, the unauthorised use of AI-generated images of the Plaintiff and his family members constitutes a blatant invasion of their privacy and their fundamental rights."

Legal Framework: Weaving Together IP Torts and Constitutional Rights

While India lacks a specific statute defining "personality rights," the court drew upon a well-established tapestry of legal principles to grant relief. Shetty's plaint invoked his rights to privacy and dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution, moral rights under the Copyright Act, and common law torts like passing off.

Justice Doctor's order explicitly recognized the commercial harm caused by the infringements. He noted that the unauthorized use of Shetty’s persona created "a false sense of endorsement or affiliation," which misleads the public and constitutes "classic passing off, misappropriation of goodwill, and consumer deception." This reasoning is crucial for legal practitioners as it reaffirms that personality rights encompass not just the right to be left alone (privacy) but also the right to control the commercial exploitation of one's identity (publicity).

The actor, who has a career spanning over three decades and a social media following exceeding 13 million, is seeking ₹15 crore in damages for the harm to his brand and reputation.

The John Doe Order and Intermediary Liability

A key strategic and practical element of the court's order is the inclusion of a "John Doe" defendant. This allows the injunction to apply to unknown and anonymous individuals who are notoriously difficult to identify and serve in online infringement cases. The court acknowledged the necessity of this measure, stating, "Given the clandestine and continuing nature of these activities and the ongoing harm, the Plaintiff has correctly impleaded Defendant No. 1, 'John Doe/Ashok Kumar,' to represent the entire class of such unknown persons."

Furthermore, the court issued direct instructions to intermediaries. Meta Platforms (owner of Facebook and Instagram) and X Corp (formerly Twitter) have been directed to remove the infringing content within one week of notification and, crucially, to disclose subscriber details of the accounts responsible for uploading it when requested by Shetty's legal team. This directive reinforces the due diligence obligations of digital platforms and provides a mechanism for victims to unmask anonymous infringers.

A Growing Trend Among Indian Celebrities

Shetty’s case is the latest in a series of high-profile lawsuits filed by Indian celebrities to protect their persona, primarily before the Delhi High Court. This judicial trend has seen a remarkable convergence in recognizing a broad suite of protections against digital-era threats.

• Amitabh Bachchan (2022): The Delhi High Court passed a sweeping order restraining the public at large from infringing his publicity rights.
• Anil Kapoor (2023): The court protected not just his name and image but also his distinctive voice and signature catchphrase, "jhakaas," from commercial misuse.
• Aishwarya Rai Bachchan & Abhishek Bachchan: The court granted them relief against the use of their names, images, and AI-generated content for unauthorized merchandise and other commercial purposes.
• Karan Johar: The filmmaker secured protection against the misuse of his identity on monetized fan pages and meme accounts that diluted his professional goodwill.

This spate of litigation signals a proactive legal strategy by public figures to establish clear boundaries around their identity in an environment where digital replication is effortless and often malicious. Each successful order builds upon the last, creating a formidable body of case law that practitioners can now leverage.

Implications for the Future

The Bombay High Court's order in Suniel Shetty's case is a vital contribution to this evolving legal landscape. It explicitly addresses the menace of AI-generated deepfakes, linking their creation and dissemination directly to violations of fundamental constitutional rights. By granting a comprehensive John Doe order and imposing clear obligations on social media giants, the court has provided a practical and potent legal remedy.

For legal professionals in intellectual property, media law, and technology, this case serves as a powerful precedent. It demonstrates that Indian courts are not only recognizing the abstract concept of personality rights but are also prepared to issue muscular, forward-looking injunctions to protect them against the most modern and insidious forms of infringement. As technology continues to outpace legislation, such judicial activism will remain critical in safeguarding individual dignity and the commercial value of a public persona.

The matter is scheduled for a further hearing on November 17, 2025.