High Court
Delhi High Court stays the broadcast of Sudarshan News’ communal show
A major controversy erupted when Sudarshan News CMD & editor-in-chief Suresh Chavanke released a promo of his forthcoming episode UPSC Jihad of his television show Bindas Bol on Aug 25.
The promo clearly used disturbing and communal words and was themed on the exposé of Muslims who have infiltrated the highest working body in the government, our executive branch. The show was supposed to be aired on Aug 28 at 8 pm.
The promo, once released, immediately attracted outrage from journalists, police professionals, and IPS & IAS officers. IPS Association even issued a statement condemning the ‘communal and irresponsible piece of journalism’.
On Aug 28, the Delhi High Court stayed the proposed broadcast of the show after former and current students of Jamia Milia Islamia, filed a plea seeking a ban on the telecast. This came even as the Supreme Court on Friday declined to impose a pre-broadcast ban on the channel from airing the programme.
The plea alleged the show was an attempt to “defame, attack and incite hatred” against Jamia Milia Islamia, its alumni and the Muslim community at large. The HC stayed the broadcast until September 7.
The court also directed Sudarshan News to file a reply before September 1 on the notice issued by the ministry of information & broadcasting on the complaints it received against the show.
Justice Navin Chawla also issued a notice to the I&B ministry on the plea filed through advocate Shadan Farasat contending that the trailer of the show has “openly engaged” in hate speech.
Appearing for the I&B ministry, advocate Anurag Alhuwalia, the central government’s standing counsel, accepted the notice, following which the matter was posted for hearing on September 7.
The petition said the proposed broadcast along with the trailer violates the programme code set out under the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, read with the Cable Television Networks Rules 1994.
“The proposed broadcast and trailer also constitute hate speech and criminal defamation and is an offense under Sections 153A (1), 153B(1), 295A and 499 of the Indian Penal Code,” the plea read.
After the order was passed, the show that was supposed to be telecast was not aired. Instead, Chavanke conducted another show where he accused Jamia Milia Islamia students and alumni of using the court to get the show stopped.
The Delhi High Court on Saturday further refused to lift its stay order. This came a day after the High Court stayed the broadcast of the show.
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.
