High Court
All Phase III DAS cases to be heard by Delhi High Court early next month
NEW DELHI: The Babus in the Information and Broadcasting Ministry would certainly breathe a sigh of relief with Dellhi High Court having fixed the hearing of the large volume of cases relating to the third phase of digital addressable system pending in different High Courts for early next month.
Although the last Task Force Meeting of 26 July had been informed that the cases would be heard from 13 September 2016, Indian Broadcasting Foundation sources told indiantelevision.com that these have been pre-poned to 7 and 8 September 2016. Notices have already been issued to the Ministry as well as the petitioners in various cases.
While a bulk of the cases will be heard on the first day by Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva, two cases which had been heard by Division Benches in the High Courts – Digiana Systems and Om Network – will be heard on 8 September by a division bench of the High Court comprising Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice Sangeeta Dhingra. .
The single-bench cases include those by AP MSOs Welfare Federation, Federation of Telangana MSO, Bhima Riddhi Digital Services, Multi System Operator Welfare Association, Rohtak Cable Operators Association, Sai Big Star Welfare Association, Shyam Baba Cable Network, Bharat Digital Cable Network, Nashik Zilla Cable Operators Association and Yogesh Cable Networks.
This follows acceptance of a petition by the Information and Broadcasting Ministry to the Supreme Court asking it to transfer all linked cases to one High Court to ensure faster justice.
The Task Force meeting had been informed that a total of 62 cases had been filed in different Courts and 29 cases had been transferred by various courts to Delhi by July-end. There were no such cases in twenty states, the Task Force was told. Of the 62 cases, 12 had been disposed off by respective courts and 3 cases had been withdrawn by the petitioners.
While the Andhra Pradesh and Telengana High Court had given orders extending the deadline of 31 December 2015 for Phase III, the Bombay High Court had referred to the Kusum Ingots judgment which had said that if similar situation prevails in all states, then the stay can be pan-India. This was because the plea taken in all High Courts was shortage of set top boxes.
But for the first time, the Ministry had admitted that the Law Ministry had observed that the order passed by the Andhra Pradesh High Court staying Phase III “appears to have all lndia applicability”. For that reason, the I and B Ministry had in fact asked its counsel not to oppose the stay or extension orders in the High Courts.
indiantelevision.com had reported in January this year that the MIB had told the Punjab and Haryana high court that it had ‘decided not to press the requirement of having a STB as for now till the decision of the cases which are pending before various other high courts’
However, the Ministry later approached the apex court with a plea for transfer of all similar cases to one High Court and the apex court had asked Delhi to handle these cases and directed notices to be sent to all other High Courts to forward the files to Delhi.
The I and B Ministry will attempt to get a vacation of stay or extension of deadline in the various courts. The Ministry may also attempt to get orders directing all broadcasters, multi-system operators and local cable operators to transmit or receive signals only on signing of inter-connect agreements as stipulated by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India.
Meanwhile, Secretary Ajay Mittal in the last Task Force meeting reiterated that it was firm on Phase IV of digital addressable systems for cable television to commence on 31 December this year.
He cautioned that MSOs and LCOs should desist from transmitting or re-transmitting un-authorized TV channels which are not permitted by the Ministry. He informed that the Ministry has written to all the district collectors/magistrates in this regard to take action under the law against those who are violating the law.
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.
