Back
Transfers Vikas Divyakirti's Suit to
In a significant development for the burgeoning jurisprudence on in India, educator and former civil servant Vikas Divyakirti—founder of the prominent —approached the on Thursday seeking judicial protection against the misuse of his identity. The suit, which alleges three distinct forms of violation including the creation of fake profiles, was listed before Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav. However, the judge directed that the matter be transferred to a already seized with a series of similar cases, underscoring the court’s effort to develop a coherent legal framework for .
The order reflects a growing trend in the , which has over the past months issued a string of protective orders in favour of celebrities, sportspersons, politicians, and content creators, all aimed at curbing , , and unauthorised commercial exploitation of their identities.
A Coordinated Approach to
When Vikas Divyakirti’s counsel informed the court that the suit sought protection against three kinds of violations—chief among them the proliferation of fake social media profiles misrepresenting the educator—Justice Kaurav noted that the broader question of was already engaging the attention of a in multiple pending cases. Rather than proceed independently, the judge ordered: “Under the aforesaid circumstances, let this matter be also listed before the bench hearing the issue relating to .” The matter has now been directed to be placed before the roster bench on Tuesday.
This decision to channel the case to a specialised bench is a practical measure to ensure uniformity in the development of law. It avoids the risk of conflicting orders and allows the court to build a consistent body of precedent that can guide future disputes. For legal practitioners, this signals that the views as a distinct and evolving area of law that merits dedicated judicial attention.
The Menace of Fake Profiles and
The suit filed by Divyakirti highlights a pressing concern in the digital age: the misuse of a person’s name, image, and likeness through fake accounts on social media platforms. Such accounts are often used to spread misinformation, damage reputation, or even perpetrate financial fraud. The counsel for Divyakirti specifically told the court that the suit seeks to address three kinds of violations, including the creation of fake profiles that impersonate the educator. While the exact reliefs sought and the parties arrayed as defendants were not detailed at this preliminary stage, the case is understood to target the platforms that host such content, including , the parent company of Facebook and Instagram.
, also known as the , allow individuals to control the commercial use of their identity. In India, these rights are not codified in a single statute but have been recognised by courts as an extension of the fundamental right to privacy under , as well as through principles of and . The rise of artificial intelligence tools capable of generating convincing has only intensified the need for robust legal remedies.
A Growing Body of Precedent
The has been at the forefront of protecting . In recent months, it has passed orders safeguarding the identities of a wide array of public figures. These include actress Tabu, cricketers Abhishek Sharma and Yuvraj Singh, political figures like Congress leader Shashi Tharoor and Andhra Pradesh Deputy Chief Minister Pawan Kalyan, entrepreneur Aman Gupta, Telugu actor Allu Arjun, Malayalam actor Mohanlal, spiritual preacher Aniruddhacharya, singer Jubin Nautiyal, former cricketer Sunil Gavaskar, and actors Kajol Devgan, R Madhavan, and NTR Junior. A similar suit has also been filed by actor Salman Khan.
The coordinate benches have extended protection to “The Art of Living” foundation founder Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, Telugu actor Nagarjuna, Bollywood actors Aishwarya Rai Bachchan and Abhishek Bachchan, and film producer Karan Johar. Notably, the court also protected the of journalist Sudhir Chaudhary, who had sought relief regarding the circulation of allegedly misleading and AI-generated videos against him on social media. In another case, the court passed a “John Doe” order—a against unknown persons—to protect the of podcaster Raj Shamani, observing that he is a known face in India, especially in the field of content creation.
These orders typically restrain unauthorised use of the individual’s name, image, voice, or likeness, and direct social media platforms to take down infringing content. The courts have also recognised that the right to control one’s identity extends to the digital realm and can be enforced even against anonymous wrongdoers.
Legal Implications and the Way Forward
The transfer of Divyakirti’s suit to the is a strategic move that will allow the court to address common legal issues across multiple cases. Key questions likely to be examined include the scope of vis-à-vis and , the liability of like social media platforms, and the adequacy of existing remedies under the , and the .
For legal professionals, this case underscores the importance of staying abreast of developments in litigation. The ’s proactive approach provides a template for similar actions in other jurisdictions. Moreover, the use of John Doe orders and offers immediate relief to victims of , but the long-term solution may require legislative intervention.
As the matter awaits hearing on Tuesday, the legal community will be watching closely to see whether the will lay down broader principles or continue to issue case-specific orders. For now, Vikas Divyakirti’s case adds to the growing list of public figures who are turning to the courts to reclaim control over their digital identities in an age where anyone can be impersonated with a few clicks.
