Delhi HC Questions Janhvi Kapoor's Plea Seeking Protection of Personality Rights

The Delhi High Court has questioned the scope of actor Janhvi Kapoor’s plea seeking protection of her personality and publicity rights against alleged unauthorised use of her name, image and likeness online.

Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani was hearing Kapoor’s petition concerning thousands of webpages, social media accounts and other online material. The alleged misuse includes AI-generated deepfakes, sexually explicit content, impersonation accounts, fake booking agencies and chatbots.

The court expressed reservations about extending broad restrictions to fan pages, noting that such platforms may also contain criticism, satire or non-commercial content. It questioned whether all such material could be prohibited under personality-rights claims.

The court indicated that it was inclined to order removal of content that is clearly obscene or sexually explicit, particularly where Kapoor’s identity is allegedly being commercially exploited. Her lawyers were asked to categorise and narrow the disputed URLs rather than seek a blanket order covering thousands of links.

Kapoor’s case comes amid a growing series of celebrity personality-rights disputes in India. In 2024, Anil Kapoor obtained protection against unauthorised commercial use of his name, image, likeness, voice and signature expressions. Actor Jackie Shroff also approached the Delhi High Court over alleged misuse of his name, photographs, voice and the nickname “Bhidu”.

The issue has become more prominent with the spread of generative AI. Aishwarya Rai Bachchan and Abhishek Bachchan have taken legal action over alleged unauthorised use of their identities in AI-generated material. Tabu has also received interim protection over allegedly obscene and AI-generated content using her identity, while Varun Dhawan secured court protection against unauthorised use of his persona, including deepfakes.

The cases underline the challenge of balancing personality rights with freedom of expression, especially when courts are asked to distinguish commercial exploitation and harmful content from legitimate fan activity, satire or criticism.

In Kapoor’s matter, the court has asked her counsel to classify the disputed material, including obscene content, alleged commercial exploitation and unauthorised promotional use. The case is scheduled for further hearing on August 17.