High Court
Ban on Crime Serials on Kannada Channels sought
BANGALORE: The Karnataka government sought a direction from the High Court (HC) to ban Crime Diary and Crime Story being telecast on Kannada ETV and Udaya TV in reply to a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by an advocate on Wednesday at Bangalore.
In a matter that could have far reaching effect and consequences the PIL contends that the telecast of such serials go beyond the permissible limits and infringe upon rights of citizens and adversely effect public interest – the government has sought a blanket direction to the electronic media not to carry stories in violation of the criminal justice system.
The HC said that it was open for the state government to take action against the police officials, officers and the electronic media if they were found acting in violation of the law.
A division bench comprising of Chief Justice N K Sodhi and Justice B Padmaraj heard the PIL against the telecast of the serials that are allegedly affecting fair trial of criminal cases. Also contending that the telecast timing of 10 pm everyday would seriously affect children and could result in psychological and neurological disorders and could incite the young to take to crime, the counsel sought HCs intervention.
The petitioner Mr. A V Aamaranathan, an advocate, complained that the police were disclosing confidential information and parading the accused in front of the cameras, taking interviews of the victims, police officials and others in violation of the principles of criminal justice system and natural justice. The police officials were making statements in the serails. The serials portrayed gory scenes that were bound to have a negative effect on children and others.
The government counsel submitted that necessary instructions had been issued and action such as suspension was taken against some SIs and PIs The honorable judges directed that the some SPs and DIGs should placed to stop police officials from participating in such programmes.
The government counsel assured that necessary steps would be taken to ensure that officials did not violate the criminals justice system, but, sought a direction from the HC to stop parallel trial of criminal cases by the electronic media during then process of investigation or pendency of trials before the criminal courts.
Following arguments between the petitioners, the government counsel and the counsel representing the TV channels, the hearing has been adjourned to 17 January, 2005.
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.
