What are Personality Rights? The rise of Celebrity Lawsuits Explained

In a world where fame travels faster than fact and digital footprints outlive their owners, a celebrity’s identity has become both their greatest asset and their most vulnerable possession. From Amitabh Bachchan’s iconic baritone to Anil Kapoor’s exuberant “jhakaas,” every voice, expression, and gesture carries immense commercial and emotional value. Yet, in an era ruled by AI-generated deepfakes, viral reels, and unauthorised brand endorsements, the line between admiration and appropriation is rapidly blurring.

Recent court battles make this clearer than ever. Stars like Rajinikanth¹, Jackie Shroff², Aishwarya Rai Bachchan³, and even spiritual figures like Sri Sri Ravi Shankar⁴ have turned to the courts to stop the unauthorised use of their names, voices, and likenesses. Their efforts reflect a growing awareness of what’s known as personality rights or more popularly, the right to publicity. In October 2025, actors Hrithik Roshan and Akshay Kumar and playback singer Kumar Sanu⁵ joined the league of public figures turning to the courts for protection of their personality rights. All these people approached High Courts seeking to protect their name, image, voice, and other personality traits from unauthorised commercial use and AI-generated imitations. The Courts extended relief, affirming their personality rights and restraining misuse of their identity for commercial gain.

What are Personality Rights?

At its core, this right helps individuals protect their identity from being exploited without consent.⁶ But the bigger question remains – are these rights reserved only for the rich and famous? And how do they hold up against powerful counterclaims like freedom of speech, fair use, or creative expression?

Personality rights sit at an interesting crossroad between intellectual property, privacy, and commerce.⁷ They’re not defined in any single statute but have gradually evolved through court decisions that recognise fame as something that can be protected and even monetised.⁸ After all, being a celebrity isn’t just about talent anymore, it’s about brand value.⁹ And when that brand is used without permission, it’s not just a personal violation. It’s economic theft.¹⁰

Yet, the debate isn’t one-sided. In a world obsessed with content creation, where fans remix, parody, and recreate celebrity moments, how much control is too much control? Can we really draw a clean line between admiration and infringement? These questions lie at the heart of the ongoing conversation about personality rights in India, one that’s only growing louder in the age of AI, influencers, and instant virality.

Who is a Celebrity under Indian Laws?

The term “celebrity” originates from the Latin celebritatem, meaning “the state of being famous.”¹¹ In India, however, celebrityhood extends far beyond film stars and athletes, it includes anyone whose persona commands public attention and carries commercial value, from influencers to spiritual leaders.¹² Interestingly, Indian laws do not define who a celebrity is. The closest reference appears in the Copyright Act, 1957, which defines a “performer” under Section 2(qq) as someone who makes a performance, such as an actor, singer, musician, or dancer. Section 38 of the Copyright Act,1957 grants performers special rights over their performances, including the right to be identified as the performer and to restrain others from recording, reproducing, or broadcasting their work without consent, for a period of fifty years. Section 39 of the Copyright Act,1957 further provides remedies against infringement of these rights.

However, not every performer is a celebrity, and not every celebrity is a performer.¹³ Courts in India have, therefore, expanded the idea of protection beyond the Copyright Act,1957, recognising personality rights as part of the right to privacy and dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution.¹⁴ This judicial recognition ensures that celebrities can control how their name, image, and likeness are used commercially. Recent cases, from Aishwarya Rai Bachchan¹⁵ to Sri Sri Ravishankar¹⁶ approaching the Courts for protection of their identity, highlight how personality rights have evolved as an essential safeguard in an age of AI manipulation, deepfakes, and unauthorised digital exploitation.

Personality Rights of Celebrities under Indian Law

In India, personality rights have gradually emerged through judicial innovation rather than statutory design. The journey began around 3 decades ago, with the Supreme Court’s ruling in R. Rajagopal v. State of Tamil Nadu¹⁷ (the Auto Shankar case), where the Court recognised an individual’s right to control the commercial use of their identity as part of the fundamental right to privacy under Article 21. It affirmed that privacy includes the “right to be let alone”, limiting how personal attributes can be exploited without consent.

This foundation evolved in ICC Development (International) Ltd. v. Arvee Enterprises¹⁸, where the Delhi High Court held that the right to publicity stems from the right to privacy and inheres only in individuals, not corporations or events. The Court emphasised that a person’s name, likeness, or voice cannot be monopolised or commercialised by third parties without consent. Later, in Titan Industries v. Ramkumar Jewellers¹⁹, the Delhi High Court defined publicity rights as “the right to control commercial use of human identity.” The Madras High Court reinforced this in Shivaji Rao Gaikwad (Rajnikanth) v. Varsha Productions²⁰, recognising that once a person attains celebrity status, any unauthorised use of their persona, whether or not it causes confusion, is actionable.

The Delhi High Court’s decision in Anil Kapoor v. Simply Life India & Ors.²¹ further widened the canvas by protecting distinctive elements of a celebrity’s persona such as name, voice, gestures, and catchphrases. The Court noted that fame, while desirable, often exposes individuals to misuse, and such exploitation can violate their right to livelihood, dignity, and privacy.

Statutory and Common Law Anchors

Although India lacks a dedicated statute for personality rights, several existing frameworks offer partial protection. The Copyright Act, 1957 grants performers exclusive and moral rights under Sections 38A and 38B, allowing them to control reproduction and object to distortion of their performances. The Trade Mark Act, 1999 enables registration of names, signatures, and catchphrases as trademarks. Common-law passing off actions (under Section 27 of the Trade Mark Act, 1999) protect goodwill from false endorsements, while the Information Technology Act, 2000 penalises morphing and identity misuse online. The Penal Code, 1860 (now Nyaya Sanhita, 2023) also criminalises acts such as defamation and stalking that intrude upon privacy.

John Doe Orders and the AI Era

In recent years, John Doe orders have become a critical judicial tool to protect celebrities against online misuse. These ex parte injunctions are issued against unknown infringers, commonly referred to as John Doe or Ashok Kumar, to prevent ongoing or future violations, particularly where the offender’s identity is not yet known. Courts permit such orders under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 as an exception to the general rule under Order 7 requiring a named defendant.²² They are now routinely used in film piracy, image misuse, and AI-driven impersonation cases to secure swift and pre-emptive relief.

A series of landmark rulings in 2025 illustrate how courts are adapting these principles to modern threats. The Delhi High Court granted sweeping interim injunctions protecting Aishwarya Rai Bachchan²³ and Abhishek Bachchan²⁴ from unauthorised AI-generated videos, fake merchandise, and impersonation, ordering platforms like Google/YouTube to remove infringing content and disclose offender details. In similar fashion, Karan Johar²⁵, Akkineni Nagarjuna²⁶, and Sri Sri Ravi Shankar²⁷ secured protection from deepfakes, fake social-media profiles, and misleading endorsements, while the Bombay High Court extended relief to Asha Bhosle, whose distinctive singing style and voice were replicated by AI platforms. These judgments mark a new phase where courts explicitly treat a celebrity’s name, voice, image, and digital likeness as proprietary rights deserving immediate and technological protection. Most recently, the Bombay High Court also granted ex parte interim relief to actor Suniel Shetty²⁸, recognising his personality rights, privacy rights, and right to live with dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution, as well as his moral rights under the Copyright Act, 1957. The Court held that the actor had made a prima facie case of infringement and that denial of relief would cause irreparable harm, thereby restraining the defendants from misusing his identifiable attributes, including through AI-generated content, deepfakes, and voice cloning and directing the removal of such infringing material.

The Road Ahead

Indian jurisprudence has thus crafted a multi-layered system, rooted in constitutional guarantees and strengthened by intellectual-property and tort principles, to protect celebrity identity. Yet, the absence of a unified statute remains a pressing gap. As technology blurs the boundary between authenticity and imitation, legislative codifications of personality and publicity rights has become essential to preserve both the commercial and dignitary interests of individuals in the digital era.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1. What are Personality Rights?

   Personality rights refer to the legal protection of an individual’s persona such as their name, image, voice, signature style, or any trait that identifies them. These rights ensure that no one can use a person’s identity for commercial or misleading purposes without consent.

2. Can only celebrities claim personality rights?

   No. While celebrities are the most common claimants, personality rights can be claimed by any individual whose identity or likeness is used without consent. What matters is public recognition and misuse, not fame alone.

3. Are there any laws on Personality Rights in India?

   There is no specific law on personality rights in India. However, courts have recognised them through judicial interpretation, linking them to the right to privacy and dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution and protecting them using existing laws like the Copyright Act,1957, Trade Marks Act, 1999 and common-law remedies such as passing off.

4. How do personality rights differ from copyright?

   The Copyright Act, 1957 grants authors and performers moral rights under Sections 57 and 38-38B, including the right to be credited for their work and to prevent its distortion or misuse. These provisions reflect the spirit of personality rights, as they safeguard an individual’s creative identity and protect against unauthorised or misleading use of their personal or professional expression.

5. What was the first ruling on Personality Rights in India?

   The first major ruling recognising personality rights in India was the Supreme Court’s judgment in R. Rajagopal v. State of Tamil Nadu (1994) 6 SCC 632, popularly known as the Auto Shankar case. The Court held that every individual has the right to control the commercial use of their identity and that this right flows from the right to privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution.

6. What are the legal implications of violating personality rights?

   Misusing someone’s identity without consent can lead to civil and criminal liability. Courts may issue injunctions, order take-down of infringing material, and award damages. If the misuse defames or digitally manipulates a person, penalties may also apply under the Information Technology Act, 2000 and the Penal Code, 1860 (Nyaya Sanhita, 2023).