High Court
Contempt proceedings against channels on crime serials adjourned
BANGALORE: A division bench of the Karnataka HC comprising of justices A M Farooq and B S Patil adjourned contempt proceedings against Sun Network’s Kannada channel Udaya TV and ETV for telecasting crime based serials to March 14.
On January 12, bailable warrants were issued against the channels based on a petition filed by Bangalore advocate A. V. Amarnathan.
The programmes referred in the petition were Udaya’s Crime Story, produced and directed by Balakrishna Kakatkar and ETV’s Crime Diary produced and directed by Ravi Belegere.
As reported by indiantelevision.com over the last two months, the state government had sought direction from the HC to ban the two serials since they were effecting fair trials of criminal cases, infringe upon the rights of citizens and adversely effect public interest, based on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Amaranthan. The government had also sought a blanket direction to the media not to carry stories in violation of the criminal justice system
The Karnataka High Court (HC) had permitted the advocate general to file contempt proceedings against two Kannada crime serials following Government counsel arguments that the opinions expressed in the serials about the innocence or guilt of the accused in any manner were pre-judicial to the interest of the justice delivery system, as it amounted to holding a parallel trial. Continued telecast of the serials could constitute contempt of court.
The serials were accused of presenting facts even before filing of an FIR, such as recorded views of police officers, interviewing criminals, victims and/or their next of kin, hence resulting in a trial by media, prejudicing and interfering with the judicial proceedings.
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.
