High Court
Delhi High Court stays EC’s paid news notice to Ashok Chavan
NEW DELHI: Former Maharashtra chief minister Ashok Chavan has received an interim relief with Delhi High Court putting a stay on the show cause notice issued by the Election Commission to the Congress politician.
The Court also issued notice to BJP leaders Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi, Kirit Somaiya and one independent candidate who had filed complaint against Chavan to the EC.
The poll panel in the notice on 13 July had asked Chavan who had stood from Nanded in Maharashtra as to why he should not be disqualified for not giving correct details of his 2009 poll expenses.
A fortnight ago, the Commission had set a 20-day deadline for Chavan to respond to the notice, saying he had “failed to lodge his account of election expenses in the manner required by the (Representation of the People) Act and rules.”
Chavan had moved the court against the EC’s order, saying the panel had not followed the procedure laid out in the Representation of People Act prior to giving its findings.
He had also said that the expenses that he had allegedly not declared pertained to some advertisements that were released in October 2009 regarding a meeting that was to be held between the members of United Progressive Alliance (UPA).
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal appeared for Chavan and argued that the ex-CM did not know who had issued the advertisements.
Chavan had won the 2009 assembly election from Bhokar in Maharashtra’s Nanded Lok Sabha constituency. He won the recent Lok Sabha polls from Nanded.
It was contended that Chavan had incurred an expense of over Rs 16,000 for attending the UPA meeting that was advertised and that he had cited the same while filing his poll spends.
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.
