From Tea Stall Posters to Deepfakes: Personality Rights on Trial in India

👉 Note:
1. To read this in your preferred language, use the Google Translate feature available at the top-right corner of the page.
2. To listen to this write-up, click on the Read Aloud button! 🎧
3. The Read Aloud feature works best on desktop or laptop devices.

A few years ago, I stumbled upon a digitally altered video of Bhagat Singh seemingly singing "Mera Rang De Basanti Chola." It was hauntingly beautiful—almost like history brought to life through technology.Fast forward a few years, a deepfake video of actress Rashmika Mandanna circulated widely online, raising serious concerns about how such tools could be misused. These instances aren't just technological marvels or missteps—they're infringements of what the law calls personality rights.

This concern recently took center stage with a significant judgment from the Madras High Court on April 30, 2025. The court ordered Meta Platforms Inc. and Telegram FZ-LLC to take down fake accounts and channels that had misused the identity of choreographer Anita R. Ratnam. These platforms had hosted content using her photos, videos, and even AI-generated audio clips—without her consent—to trick people into financial scams.
This case starkly demonstrated how technology can be weaponised to exploit someone's persona and led me to reflect on how identity is used, often carelessly, in everyday spaces.

Growing up, I remember seeing barber shops adorned with posters of Bollywood actresses or auto-rickshaws showcasing images of actors like Anil Kapoor or Akshay Kumar. At the time, it felt like fan tribute. But now I wonder—do these displays also fall under the legal radar of personality rights? Technically, Yes!

When Is It a Violation?

Using someone’s image—especially a celebrity’s—without their consent for commercial exploitation can legally qualify as an infringement of personality rights. This is particularly true if it implies endorsement or is used to draw customers to a business. Even a harmless-looking poster in a salon could give the false impression that the celebrity endorses the establishment. While these instances may not always lead to legal consequences, they are technically a breach of privacy and image rights.

A Case in Point: Gautam Gambhir v. D.A.P. & Co.

A notable example of personality rights litigation is Gautam Gambhir v. D.A.P. & Co., where the cricketer sued a Delhi-based restaurant chain for using his name in outlets like “Ghungroo by Gautam Gambhir.” He argued that it created a false association. The Delhi High Court, however, ruled that since “Gautam Gambhir” is also the owner’s name and there was no intent to deceive, it didn’t constitute a violation. The case highlighted that intent and misrepresentation are key elements in determining infringement.

Why Don’t Celebrities Often Sue?

In India, casual use of celebrity images in public places like tea stall, salon or autorikshaw is although an infringment ,it is often brushed off as fan-admiration. Most celebrities don’t object, especially when there's no clear profit being made. Legal action is rare unless the usage explicitly misleads the public into believing there is an endorsement. Courts typically step in only when commercial intent or reputational damage can be clearly established.

While fan displays may be innocent, using a celebrity's name or image to boost business—such as placing a star's photo on a pub’s hoarding—crosses into problematic territory. The law draws the line at commercial exploitation without consent.

What Are Personality Rights?

In India, personality rights (also known as publicity rights) give individuals control over the commercial use of their name, voice, image, and other distinctive traits. These rights protect people—celebrities and common individuals alike—from unauthorised commercial exploitation of their identity.

The Titan Industries Ltd. v. Ramkumar Jewellers case (2012) remains foundational in this area. The Delhi High Court ruled in favour of Titan when a small local jeweller gave a similar ad in tamil newspaper using lookalike of Amitabh and Jaya Bachchan. The judgment clarified that such misuse constituted a violation of the couple’s personality rights and was distinct from copyright infringement.

Not Just for the Famous

You might wonder, “What about people who aren’t famous?” The law applies to everyone. It’s not only celebrities who enjoy these protections. Your own image is safeguarded under your right to privacy. If a photographer uses your photo for promotional purposes(for example, to showcase their work) without asking you, you can demand its removal—and even pursue legal remedies if it’s used for profit. Online misuse can be reported to the cyber cell under the Information Technology Act, 2000.

Thanks to precedents like Gautam Gambhir, Titan and the recent Anita Ratnam case, courts are increasingly recognising and protecting these rights, even though India lacks a specific statute addressing them.

Legal Framework in India

While there is no single law governing personality rights, they are protected through multiple laws.:

• Right to Privacy (Article 21): The Right to Privacy in India, primarily recognized under Article 21 in the landmark *K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India* (2017) case, grants individuals control over their personal data, body, and identity. While Article 21 is the core, Articles 14 and 19(1)(a) also support it. Article 14 ensures privacy is not violated arbitrarily or unequally, protecting individuals from discriminatory surveillance or data practices. Article 19(1)(a), which guarantees freedom of speech and expression, indirectly supports privacy by upholding informational autonomy and the right against forced expression or misrepresentation, such as in unauthorized use of one’s image or voice. Together, these provisions form a constitutional foundation for safeguarding privacy in the digital age.
• Right to Publicity: A branch of privacy rights, allowing people—especially public figures—to control the commercial use of their persona.
• Passing Off (Trademark Law): It protects individuals from unauthorised commercial use of their identity that falsely suggests endorsement. It involves misrepresentation and consumer confusion that causes the public to believe a person is associated with a product or service, leading to reputational or economic harm. For example, A clothing brand uses a model who looks like Virat Kohli in ads, implying he endorses their products. Consumers are misled into believing there's an association. This is passing off, as it involves misrepresentation and deception. Passing of protects the goodwill or reputation of the individual. In the leading case of In Titan Industries Ltd. v. Ramkumar Jewellers (2012), the use of lookalikes of Amitabh and Jaya Bachchan in an ad misled consumers into thinking the couple endorsed the brand, constituting passing off.
• Tort of Misappropriation: The unauthorised commercial use of an individual's name, likeness, or identity for commercial gain, even without any misrepresentation or confusion. For example, if any director makes a movie based on someone's life without their consent is misappropriation. Or A bakery prints Virat Kohli’s actual photo on its cake boxes without his consent, just to attract customers. Even if no one is misled about his endorsement, it's misappropriation—unauthorised commercial use of his identity. (& if misleaded it is passing off.) In the leading case of Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) v. S. Rajendran (2007), the BCCI argued that misusing players' images for promotional activities by third parties is an infringement on their personality rights. The court addressed this unauthorised use & upheld that using cricketers' images without consent for promotion, even without misrepresentation, amounted to misappropriation of their personality rights.
• Copyright Act, 1957: Offers limited support through performer rights (Sections 38 and 38A), protecting voice and performance recordings.

Challenges and Limitations

Despite judicial support, personality rights enforcement is tricky. Common names complicate lawsuits, as seen in the Gambhir case. Moreover, without dedicated legislation, much depends on how courts interpret existing laws.

Final Thoughts

In our digital age, where images and voices can be replicated at the click of a button, personality rights matter more than ever. Whether it’s a celebrity or an ordinary citizen, everyone has the right to control how their identity is used. Landmark cases like Titan and Anita Ratnam have pushed the conversation forward, but India still needs comprehensive legislation to tackle the growing complexities of identity misuse.

So next time you see a celebrity’s face in a salon or tea stall, remember: behind that image lies a legal right that guards against unauthorised use—a right that belongs to them, and to you.

---

Let’s end here for today. I’ll be back next week with a new, game-changing judgment!

Interested in more updates on Indian law? Subscribe to the blog and never miss a case that could shape the future of India.

Have insights, questions, or experiences to share? Join the conversation in the comments below — your perspective matters!

Image Source: Google

– Anupama
Stay informed. Stay empowered.

---

Written by: Anupama Singh | Legal Blogger
The Legal Trifecta: IPR | Cyber Law | Property Law

---