Respected Public Figure: Delhi High Court Protects Personality Rights Of Shashi Tharoor Over Deepfake Videos Containing Politically Sensitive Statements
The MP had approached the Delhi High Court seeking a permanent injunction to restrain the misappropriation of his personality and publicity rights.
The Delhi High Court has granted relief to Congress Member Of Parliament (MP) Shashi Tharoor in a personality rights case by directing the taking down of videos and other infringing links including deepfakes and fabricated videos maliciously depicting him making politically sensitive statements praising Pakistan’s diplomatic strategies.
The MP had approached the High Court seeking a permanent injunction to restrain the misappropriation of his personality and publicity rights, impersonation, passing off, and the unauthorised publication of synthetically generated information, including deepfakes.
The Single Bench of Justice Mini Pushkarna held, “Having heard learned Senior Counsel for the plaintiff, this Court notes that the plaintiff is a respected and recognised public figure and accordingly, enjoys personality rights / publicity rights over all facets of his personality. Thus, the plaintiff has exclusive control over the utilization of his personality. No one can utilize and/or misappropriate and/or imitate any facet of the plaintiff’s personality, and/or exploit the same deceptively, or in any manner whatsoever, without the express consent/authorization of the plaintiff.”
Senior Advocate Amit Sibal represented the Petitioner, while Advocate Amee Rana represented the Respondent.
Factual Background
The plaintiff, a globally respected author, public figure, former international diplomat, and a fourth-term Member of Parliament, claimed that he earned immense goodwill, credibility, and public trust. It was brought to the Court’s notice that in or around March, 2026, the plaintiff discovered a sophisticated, malicious campaign orchestrated by unknown infringers, i.e., the first across various digital platforms. Further, the infringers had weaponised artificial intelligence and machine learning to generate hyper-realistic audio-visual deepfakes by cloning the plaintiff’s face, voice, vocabulary, and mannerisms.
As per the Petitioner, these fabricated videos maliciously depicted him making politically sensitive statements that he never made, including “Pakistan is faring much better diplomatically than India” and praise for Pakistan’s diplomatic strategies as “absolute brilliance”. The plaintiff claimed that such content was calculated to mislead the public and cause serious harm to the plaintiff’s credibility, reputation, and public standing, resulting in significant mental anguish and harassment.
Reasoning
The Bench recognised the fact that the plaintiff is a respected and recognised public figure and accordingly, enjoys personality rights/publicity rights over all facets of his personality. The Bench further explained that personality rights/publicity rights are protectable under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution.
As per the Bench, the plaintiff’s reputation, goodwill, name, physical appearance/image/likeness, voice, mannerisms, styles, signature oratorical style, and other attributes are uniquely identifiable and associated with the plaintiff. “The same form the plaintiff’s “Personality”, over which the plaintiff enjoys sole and exclusive control”, the Bench further mentioned.
“Thus, misappropriation of any attribute of the plaintiff’s personality without his express permission for any purpose and the harm caused to the reputation and goodwill of the plaintiff, is liable to be restrained”, the order read.
Holding that a prima facie case was made out by the plaintiff, the Bench restrained the defendants (John Doe) from reproducing, misappropriating, or imitating any facet of the plaintiff’s persona, including, but not limited to his name, visual likeness and image, distinct voice, signature oratorical cadence and manner of speaking, and highly refined vocabulary, to create, publish, or disseminate any synthetic media, deepfakes, voice-cloned audio, or morphed videos.
The Bench also asked X to take down and block the infringing links. “Defendant no. 3 is directed to ensure that the following links/URLs on Instagram, which have already been made inaccessible, shall continue to remain inaccessible”, it further directed.
Cause Title: Shashi Tharoor v. Ashok Kumar & Ors. (Case No.: CS(OS) 414/2026)
Appearance
Petitioner: Senior Advocate Amit Sibal, Advocates Tine Abraham, Pundrikaksh Mitruka, Vivek Krishnani, Ramayni Sood, Ankit Handa, Darpan Sachdeva, Nikhil Narenoran, Kuruvila Jacob
Respondent: Advocates Amee Rana, Nitya Nath, Komal Pathak, CGSC Rukhmini Bobde, Govt Pleader Manish Rawat, Advocates Vinayak Aren, Aishwarya Nigam, Shrishti Singh, Abhishek Mohanpuria