The veteran actor filed a petition on Monday, alleging unauthorized use of his photographs, synthetic voice and AI‑generated persona by firms in Delhi.
Manoj Bajpayee, the 57‑year‑old star best known for his gritty roles, walked into the Delhi High Court on Monday and asked the bench to shield his likeness, voice and even the digital echo of his personality. The petition, filed before Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, alleges that a Delhi‑based design house displayed his photographs as if he were modelling its suits, while a separate defendant allegedly deployed artificial‑intelligence tools to reproduce his voice for commercial gain.
Senior Advocate Swathi Sukumar appeared on the actor’s behalf, laying out a three‑pronged grievance: misuse of still images, synthetic voice replication and the looming threat of chat‑bots that could weaponise his identifiable traits. The court’s first order was to examine whether it had the jurisdiction to hear a case filed by a Mumbai‑resident against parties anchored in Delhi. Justice Kaurav pressed the counsel for a clear link, and Sukumar pointed out that the defendants operate out of the capital, satisfying the territorial test.
The judge also hinted at a procedural shortcut. She remarked that if defendants do not contest the filing, the matter could be dealt with by the Registrar rather than consuming full courtroom time. That comment shows a growing judicial appetite for streamlining personality‑rights disputes, especially as AI‑driven deepfakes become commonplace.
Bajpayee’s legal team has been instructed to submit past interim and final orders from similar cases, creating a paper trail that could shape the court’s approach. The Delhi High Court has already ruled in favour of several high‑profile personalities – from Tabu and Allu Arjun to Kajol and Jr NTR – granting them protection against unauthorised commercial exploitation of their image or voice.
Why the case matters
India’s personality‑rights jurisprudence is still in its infancy, but the stakes are rising fast. The technology that can clone a celebrity’s timbre or stitch together a convincing video of them saying something they never did is no longer a sci‑fi fantasy. For an actor whose career hinges on the authenticity of his performance, the prospect of a synthetic double could erode both brand value and fan trust.
Legal scholars note that existing copyright and trademark statutes do not neatly cover the replication of a person’s vocal patterns or facial nuances. Courts are therefore forced to interpret the broader right to publicity, a concept that protects the commercial use of one’s identity. Bajpayee’s petition throws a spotlight on how that right can be extended to AI‑generated outputs.
The petition also names H2PG Designs Private Limited as a defendant, accusing it of using the actor’s pictures in promotional material that implied he endorsed the brand’s suits. While the suit’s outcome remains pending, the allegation alone raises questions about how easily a celebrity’s image can be harvested from social media or press kits and repurposed without consent.
If the bench leans in Bajpayee’s direction, it could set a precedent that forces advertisers, app developers and even content platforms to seek explicit permission before deploying a celebrity’s likeness, real or synthetic. Conversely, a narrow ruling might leave a legal vacuum that AI‑tool developers could exploit.
The hearing concluded with a request for the counsel to file the comparative orders and for the court to schedule a further date. As the legal battle unfolds, the entertainment industry watches closely – not just for Bajpayee’s personal protection, but for the ripple effect on every star whose face and voice are now digital commodities.
The next hearing is yet to be announced, but one thing is clear: the fight over who gets to control a celebrity’s digital echo has officially entered the courtroom.
Be the first to comment
Join the argument. No password, just your email or a passkey.