High Court
Centre’s opinion sought on YouTube uploads; notice issued on AIB case
NEW DELHI: The Bombay High Court has asked the Information and Broadcasting Ministry’s opinion on the screening mechanism of YouTube uploads.
This followed a public interest litigation (PIL) against the AIB Roast programme by law professor Sharmila Ghuge, who sought guidelines for a screening mechanism to keep a check on obscene and vulgar videos uploaded on YouTube.
AIB (All India Bakchod) filed an intervention application in the matter. “We oppose this petition. It was a humorous show for a private audience. None of the private audience found it offensive. The language was excessive, but within the bounds of humour,” AIB’s senior counsel Mahesh Jethmalani told the division bench of Justices V.M. Kanade and Revati Mohite Dere.
The court admitted the intervention plea. AIB will file a reply, if any, to the petition within the next two weeks. The Union of India too has been directed to file its opinion within two weeks. The court will hear the matter next on 3 March.
Along with the PIL, the petitioner also submitted a copy of the CD about the programme, which was conducted in Mumbai in December last year. Its videos were uploaded on YouTube later. The petitioner also transcribed the excerpts of the show, and told the court that the content was objectionable.
When the court said that only those who are defamed can file a defamation suit, Ghuge’s advocate Shyam Dewane said, “This (programme) has crossed the limits of morality. The language used is such that it crosses the limit of decency. It is obscene to the core, and it particularly affects the minds of the youths.”
In the PIL, Ghuge said, “Whereas, the film stars have made a deliberate attempt to lower the dignity of women by showing their insensitive attitude towards the most heinous crime of rape by passing several jokes on rape and gang rape enjoying the flavour of humour for the most unfortunate act any women can ever face in her life. Not only this, cracking jokes on gays, race, rape, ebola and making homophobic jokes is an absolute insult to not only to women but all the individuals.”
She has said such remarks will adversely affect the youth of the country. “That such a rapid augmentation of audience to this video is unquestionably aiming to adversely affect the youth of this nation. Particularly the sway and influence of these film stars is beyond imagination on the youth. These celebrities are youth icons and the young generation blindly follows them which indeed is misleading and disgraceful for the nation in such incidences.”
Dewane said there was need for a mechanism to filter out vulgar and obscene videos from YouTube. The court thereafter sought Union government’s say on the matter.
“That the video of the AIB show, which has been uploaded on 28 January, 2015 has not been verified by any of the authorities, whether the content of the video is suitable to be thrown open to public at large. The said video has been uploaded by the organisers of the AIB show as evident from the titles of the video. Neither the organisers nor the respondents felt the need and importance of verifying the content before putting the video on air, which needless to state has gone viral amongst people, more particularly youths,” the PIL has stated.
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.
