From Aishwarya Rai to Karan Johar, why Indian celebs are lawyering up for their personality rights

In the first two weeks of September alone, actors Aishwarya Rai Bachchan and Abhishek Bachchan, and filmmaker Karan Johar have approached the Delhi High Court, seeking to protect their ‘personality rights’. In doing so they hope to join Amitabh Bachchan, Anil Kapoor, and Jackie Shroff, who have already secured such legal safeguards.

Mint takes a closer look at this growing legal trend, the specific cases, and what’s driving this surge in personality-rights litigation.

Which celebrities are seeking or have sought such protection?

The latest wave of litigation began on 9 September, when Aishwarya Rai Bachchan petitioned the Delhi High Court against aishwaryaworld.com and other alleged infringers. Her plea highlighted unauthorized use of her name and likeness, including AI-generated explicit content and flagged a wider trend of online fraudsters exploiting celebrities’ identities.

On 10 September, her husband Abhishek Bachchan filed a similar plea to protect his persona. The Delhi High Court granted interim protection to both, noting their high-profile status and the need to secure their commercial interests.

On 15 September filmmaker Karan Johar followed suit, asking the court to protect his personality rights. He named YouTube in his plea and asked that videos and GIFs using his clips without permission be taken down. The court is yet to pass an interim order in Johar’s case.

These cases build on earlier rulings in which the Delhi High Court recognized personality rights as part of the fundamental right to dignity and privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution. In November 2022, Amitabh Bachchan successfully petitioned to protect his name, image and voice. Last year, Jackie Shroff secured protection for his nicknames ‘Jackie’ and ‘Jaggu Dada’ and his popular phrase ‘bhidu’. In 2023, Anil Kapoor obtained an order barring the unauthorized use of his likeness and his iconic catchphrase “jhakaas”.

Beyond Bollywood, former cricketer Yuvraj Singh won a case in April 2024 against a builder that used his image in promotional materials without his consent. Journalist Rajat Sharma also approached the Delhi High Court in 2024 against a show titled Baap Ki Adalat, which mimicked his long-running programme Aap Ki Adalat. Both cases reinforced the application of personality rights outside the film industry.

What’s driving the surge?

According to intellectual property lawyers, rapid digitalization and the rise of social media have made it easier for unauthorized actors to exploit celebrity images, GIFs, catchphrases, merchandise and videos. Advances in AI and deepfake technology have amplified these risks by making it easy to manipulate photos and videos and generate explicit content. Also, a celebrity’s public persona carries significantly more economic value than it used to in previous generations, making its protection a necessity.

“Celebrities derive a significant portion of their income from endorsements. By securing personality rights, they ensure their identity is not commercially exploited without consent and due credit,” said Amit Kumar Panigrahi, partner and head of trademarks at Kochhar & Co. “While concerns over misuse are genuine, the larger push is to monetise commercial interests tied to their persona.”

Ankit Rajgarhia, designate partner, Bahuguna Law Associates, said celebrities don’t always need to approach the courts to safeguard their personality rights. They can instead trademark names and brands, secure media undertakings, and use contracts and consent agreements to reduce their reliance on litigation.

Personality rights under Indian law

Under Indian law, personality rights protect an individual’s name, likeness, image, voice, signature, or other identifiable aspects of their persona from unauthorized commercial exploitation. These rights are not explicitly codified but are recognised through common law principles of privacy, defamation and the right to publicity, and have been reinforced by judicial precedents. Courts can grant injunctions, damages, or takedown orders to prevent misuse in ads, merchandise, AI-generated content, or online platforms.

Do non-celebrities have these rights?

Yes, but with limitations. Personality rights stem from the right to privacy, dignity, and personal autonomy under Article 21 of the Constitution. This means they aren’t just for celebrities but for any Indian citizen, said Amit Kumar Panigrahi of Kochhar & Co.

However, in practice, courts typically address the commercial exploitation aspect only if a celebrity is involved. For most people, the law is more about protecting privacy or countering defamation.

What’s the role of online platforms?

In their petitions, celebrities have named platforms such as YouTube as parties, seeking proactive removal of infringing content, leading to court orders for platforms to remove such content.

According to Pooja Kapadia, partner at Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas, platforms enjoy safe harbor protections as intermediaries but must exercise due diligence by swiftly removing infringing material and employing preventive measures. “These safeguards,” she added, “must be balanced with creators’ rights to free expression, including legitimate commentary, parody and artistic use.”

Personality rights vs freedom of expression

Legal experts warned that excessive enforcement of personality rights could restrict parody, satire and mimicry, long cherished in Indian popular culture and protected under free speech.

“There is a clear tension between personality rights and freedom of expression,” said Nilesh Tribhuvann, managing partner at White & Brief. “Going forward, courts are likely to draw clearer boundaries, allowing parody and commentary while cracking down on commercial misappropriation.”

The road ahead

Experts said they expect more such lawsuits as celebrities push the limits of personality rights. Courts may set clearer rules for parody, satire, biopics and news reporting to balance commercial protection with creative freedom. Many expect Parliament to consider a statutory framework for personality rights in India, one that protects public figures without curbing creativity or fair criticism.