Kriti Sanon Approaches Delhi High Court to Protect Her Personality Rights Against AI Misuse

Bollywood actress Kriti Sanon has approached the Delhi High Court seeking legal protection of her personality and publicity rights against the alleged unauthorised use of her name, image, likeness and other identity attributes — including through artificial-intelligence-generated content and digital impersonation.

The matter came up for hearing on Friday, October 16, 2026, before a single-judge bench of Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav. The judge asked Sanon’s counsel, Advocate Pravin Anand, to place on record a compilation of relevant judgments, research papers and other material on the legal issues surrounding personality rights. The court indicated it would pass a comprehensive order after examining that material, and the matter has been listed for further hearing on October 29, 2026.

Observing that such matters are coming before the court frequently, Justice Kaurav sought a broader examination of the legal principles involved — including what exactly personality rights cover, the extent of protection available, and whether such disputes fall within the jurisdiction of the High Court’s Intellectual Property Division. Anand submitted that personality rights could extend to an individual’s name, voice, face, image, photographs and videos, and pointed to the commercial use of a person’s identity without consent as a key concern. He told the court the requested compilation would be filed the same day.

Sanon’s plea is the latest in a fast-growing wave of personality-rights disputes before the Delhi High Court, driven by deepfakes, fake endorsements and unauthorised commercial exploitation of public figures’ identities. In recent months, Gautam Gambhir, Sunil Gavaskar, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, Arjun Kapoor, Allu Arjun, Nagarjuna, Varun Dhawan, Kajol, Aishwarya Rai Bachchan, Abhishek Bachchan, Jubin Nautiyal, Karan Johar, podcaster Raj Shamani, Congress MP Shashi Tharoor and Naga Chaitanya have secured or sought court protection against the unauthorised use of their identity, likeness or AI-generated imitations.

Notably, the issue of personality rights versus free expression is itself before the court — in a related batch of cases, Advocate Gautam Bhatia was appointed amicus curiae and argued that personality-rights claims deserve careful scrutiny, warning that overbroad protection could affect satire, memes and fan-made creator content. No statute in India defines personality rights; courts have built the protection case by case, drawing on privacy rights, the law of passing off and trademark principles.

No final order on Sanon’s plea has been passed yet — the October 29 hearing will decide the way forward.

Source: IANS, WebIndia123, LawChakra, The Times of Bengal.