Personality rights protections for actor Kriti Sanon are now before the Delhi High Court, which on Friday indicated it would undertake a wider review of the legal framework underpinning such claims, given the growing number of comparable petitions reaching the bench.
During the hearing, the bench directed Pravin Anand — counsel acting on behalf of Sanon — to compile a thorough dossier of case law and supporting research on personality rights, covering both the scope of protections those rights attract and the authority of the High Court's Intellectual Property Division to hear disputes of that nature. Noting that such matters were coming before the court with growing regularity, the judge called for a broader legal inquiry extending beyond the particulars of the case at hand.
Judges at the bench pressed Anand to outline what personality rights actually cover — the personal attributes of an individual that law might protect — and whether the IPD holds jurisdiction over disputes of that nature. In the legal submission put forward by Anand, personality rights were described as capable of covering a person's name, voice, physical appearance, photographs, and video recordings. The unauthorised commercial exploitation of a person's identity was among the concerns he flagged as relevant to cases of this kind.
Justice Kaurav directed counsel to bring relevant case law and research materials before the bench, asking whether any applicable research papers could be provided. The bench directed counsel to furnish submissions and analysis on the question of personality rights, noting that a broad order would be considered once the relevant materials had been reviewed.
Addressing the court, Anand indicated that the compilation would be lodged before the day's end and put forward the position that no question of jurisdiction arose in connection with Sanon's matter. A follow-up hearing in the case has been scheduled for 29 October.
A growing number of personality rights petitions — lodged by actors, athletes, and other prominent individuals — forms the broader context in which these proceedings are unfolding at the Delhi High Court. At the heart of these disputes typically lie claims that a person's name, image, voice, or other distinguishing attributes were drawn upon without permission, most often in pursuit of commercial gain.
Personality rights petitions involving a range of well-known figures — among them film actors Kangana Ranaut, Tabu, and Vijay Deverakonda, cricketers Abhishek Sharma and Yuvraj Singh, politician Shashi Tharoor of the Congress party, and Andhra Pradesh Deputy Chief Minister Pawan Kalyan — have come before this court on earlier occasions.
Widespread adoption of digital tools and AI-driven technologies has added complexity to the matter, particularly where disputes arise over unauthorised reproductions in digital form, the impersonation of individuals, synthetic media such as deepfakes, and the commercial exploitation of a public figure's likeness or identity.
Under most legal frameworks, the concept of personality rights functions as a protection against the commercial or other unauthorised use of a person's defining characteristics. Where such disagreements arise, the legal territory they cover can extend across privacy protections, rights over one's public image, intellectual property ownership, and the commercial exploitation of personal identity. When weighing protections tied to a public figure's identity, courts also consider how those rights interact with other recognised interests — among them freedom of expression, news gathering, artistic endeavour, and comparable lawful purposes.
A body of legal reference materials, assembled at the court's direction, is set to inform its deliberations on the scope of personality rights protections and the question of which venue holds proper jurisdiction over disputes of that nature.
