Shark Tank Star Aman Gupta Scores Major Win: Delhi HC Cracks Down on AI Deepfakes and Persona Theft

In a landmark ruling for the digital era, the Delhi High Court has granted entrepreneur and Shark Tank India judge Aman Gupta sweeping ex-parte interim relief , shielding his personality rights , registered trademarks, and public image from rampant online exploitation. Justice Tushar Rao Gedela's order on May 7, 2026 , targets a web of unauthorized uses—from fake event bookings and merchandise to AI chatbots and sexually explicit deepfakes—across dozens of platforms and rogue websites.

From boAt Tycoon to Global Icon: The Rise Fueling the Fight

Aman Gupta, co-founder of India's top audio wearable brand boAt (under Imagine Marketing India Pvt. Ltd.) and founder-CEO of OFF/BEAT, has built a formidable public persona over years on Shark Tank India , brand endorsements like Flipkart's "Kuch Bhi Ho Sakta Hai!" , and international forums alongside the Prime Minister. With 1.7 million Instagram followers (@boatxman), 3 million on LinkedIn, and accolades from Forbes, GQ, and the Government of India , Gupta claims his catchphrases—"Hum Bhi Bana Lenge" and "Down, But Not Out!" (both trademarked)—hold massive commercial value.

The suit (CS(COMM) 462/2026) arrays John Doe/Ashok Kumar (unknown infringers) and platforms like Google LLC (D-4), plus event sites, e-commerce sellers, and social media hosts as defendants. Gupta alleges a "systematic and widespread misappropriation" via:

  • Fake listings on sites like blackhattalent.com portraying him for paid gigs.
  • Unauthorized merch on Amazon, Flipkart, Myntra bearing his slogans.
  • AI chatbots on Telegram impersonating him with boAt ties.
  • Pornographic deepfakes and obscene GIFs on sites like goindian.net.
  • Rogue Instagram profiles and fake contact details for scams.

Filed as a commercial suit under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 , Gupta sought urgent injunctions under Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 CPC , citing irreparable harm to his goodwill.

Plaintiff's Blitz: A Gallery of Digital Doppelgangers

Gupta's counsel, led by Senior Advocate Ms. Diya Kapur , painted a vivid picture of infringement, annexing screenshots of over 40 defendants' pages exploiting his likeness, voice, and traits. Key claims:

  • Personality & Publicity Rights : Protection for name, image, voice, mannerisms, and phrases under common law, Article 21 privacy rights, and passing off .
  • Trademark Violation : Registered marks (Nos. 5764901 & 5764905) diluted by fake merch and endorsements.
  • Urgent Threats : Deepfakes risk "public ridicule" and "unjust enrichment," especially obscene content luring clicks for profit.

No substantive defense was heard—ex-parte due to urgency, as exempted from pre-institution mediation per Supreme Court 's Yamini Manohar vs. T.K.D. Keerthi (2024) 5 SCC 815.

Court's Sharp Eye: Prima Facie Proof in Pixels

Justice Gedela meticulously reviewed evidence, including pictorial annexures of infringing sites. He noted Gupta's "stellar success" via boAt's Rs. 3 lakh crore+ revenue under his leadership, awards like ET 40 Under 40, and global exposure affirm a "unique" persona.

Prima facie , defendants' acts—monetizing fake bookings, chatbots, and deepfakes—violate exclusivity. The judge emphasized vigilance in trademarks and the "exclusive" nature of Gupta's attributes.

"The manner in which the defendants are exploiting his name, voice, persona, slogans, registered trade marks of the plaintiff positively assert the underlying fact of plaintiffs’ personality which are exclusive to him and none else."

On deepfakes:

"It goes without saying that the sexually explicit material/videos created by the defendants using the personality traits and attributes of the plaintiff, surely is an aspect which needs immediate and urgent consideration by the Court whether the same are predicated on personality rights or not."

Citing no other precedents directly but aligning with publicity rights evolution, the court balanced urgency against intermediaries' notice.

Dynamic Injunction: Takedowns, Blocks, and Future-Proofing

The court issued broad restraints on Defendants 1 & 6-45:

  • No misuse of name, image, voice, GIFs via AI/deepfakes.
  • Halt trademark infringement and passing off .
  • Platforms (e.g., Google, Instagram hosts) must delete Annexure-A links (70+ URLs) and disclose user data for fake accounts.
  • Newly found sites? Plaintiff notifies intermediaries for domain suspension; implead via Order I Rule 10 CPC .

Non-primary infringing sites get hearing liberty. Suit registered; next hearing October 1, 2026 .

Ripple Effects: A Blueprint for Celebrity Entrepreneurs?

This "first for entrepreneurs," as noted in court circles, extends personality rights to AI threats, signaling platforms' takedown duties. Gupta's win underscores digital vigilance—future cases may cite it for quick relief against deepfake harms, potentially reshaping online accountability in India.