High Court
Bombay high court permits persons above 65 years to work on film, TV sets
MUMBAI: The Bombay high court has quashed Maharashtra government’s order for age limit on set. After constant appeal from the Indian Motion Pictures Producers Association (IMPPA) and Cine And TV Artistes' Association (CINTAA), the high court has finally allowed all people above 65 years of age associated with the entertainment industry to resume work on the sets of films and TV shows.
A bench of chief justice Dipankar Datta and justice AS Gadkari, while hearing two petitions filed by the Indian Motion Pictures Producers Association (IMPPA) and actor Pramod Pandey, have taken this decision.
The division bench of judges has allowed all producers, technicians, workers and artists to work. However, they will have to strictly adhere to the advisories which are applicable to all senior citizens as is applicable in case of all other citizens in the state.
Earlier the high court had questioned the state government on the concerned matter and asked how it can stop senior citizens from working and earning a livelihood.
The court had, during the hearing, appointed senior counsel Sharad Jagtiani as amicus curiae in the matter. IMPPA and television artist Promod Pande were represented by advocate Ashok Saraogi.
According to IFTPC chairman TV wing JD Majethia there is certain ambiguity in the order. It is Bombay high court’s judgement but the film and television fraternity will also need to have clarification from Maharashtra government. He adds, “The major challenge in this issue is that insurance companies are not giving insurance cover for people above the age of 60 years. And as per the protocols, every member present on the set needs to have Covid2019 insurance cover. We will reach Maharashtra government for clarity, we will also speak to our lawyers to understand the order and will appeal to the government to revise copy.”
Earlier IMPPA President TP Aggarwal had stated that that for all senior producers, directors, actors and technicians the creative medium is the only source of income and the guideline was not practical and was not fair as in no other profession this condition was imposed. After sending requests many times, the association had to move the high court for demanding the rights of earning one’s livelihood for these senior people from the fraternity.
Apart from that, Cine And TV Artistes' Association (CINTAA) senior vice president and actor Manoj Joshi had met the governor of Maharashtra Bhagat Singh Koshyari to discuss this issue. CINTAA had also sent letters to chief minister Uddhav Thackeray, minister Subash Desai and former chief minister Devendra Fadnavis.
High Court
Bombay HC likely to protect Kartik Aaryan’s personality rights
Actor seeks Rs 15 crore damages over AI misuse, deepfakes and merch
MUMBAI: In an age where faces can be faked and voices cloned, even stardom needs legal armour. The Bombay High Court has indicated it will pass an order safeguarding the personality and publicity rights of Bollywood actor Kartik Aaryan, following allegations of widespread digital misuse of his identity.
The matter, heard by Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh, centres on a plea filed by Aaryan seeking a broad John Doe injunction against 16 defendants, including e-commerce platforms, social media intermediaries and unidentified entities. The court noted the concerns raised and said appropriate orders would be issued.
At the heart of the case lies the growing threat of artificial intelligence-driven impersonation. Aaryan’s petition flags multiple instances of deepfake content circulating across platforms such as YouTube and Instagram, where his likeness has allegedly been used to create fabricated videos, including false romantic link-ups and objectionable scenarios designed to drive engagement.
In one particularly alarming example, the actor’s legal filing cites AI-generated visuals that falsely associate him with controversial global figures, including Jeffrey Epstein. The plea argues that such content not only misleads audiences but also causes serious reputational damage.
The concerns extend beyond content to commerce. The suit alleges that unauthorised merchandise bearing Aaryan’s name and image is being sold across platforms such as Amazon, Flipkart and Redbubble, without his consent. Additionally, the actor has raised red flags over AI-powered chatbots that mimic his voice and simulate conversations, warning of potential misuse in fraudulent activities.
Aaryan’s filing underscores that he is the registered proprietor of the trademark “Kartik Aaryan”, with his name, voice and likeness carrying significant commercial value. The unauthorised use of these attributes, the plea states, leads to “immediate and irreparable harm” to his goodwill.
Seeking both preventive and punitive relief, the actor has requested a permanent injunction restraining entities from exploiting his identity in any form be it name, voice, signature or distinctive dialogue style. He has also sought damages amounting to Rs 15 crore for alleged commercial misappropriation and reputational loss.
The case highlights a larger legal and cultural moment, where the lines between reality and replication are increasingly blurred. As AI tools become more accessible, courts are now being called upon to define the boundaries of identity in the digital age, where a face may be famous, but control over it is no longer guaranteed.
