High Court
Election Commission to allot time to five state assemblies for poll broadcast on DD, AIR
NEW DELHI: All India Radio and Doordarshan, which provides a platform to political parties for their poll broadcasts before election, will also organise panel discussions or debates at the Kendras/Stations for the forthcoming elections, for the state assemblies of Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Mizoram and the National Capital Territory of Delhi.
The eligible party can nominate one representative for this programme, but only the Election Commission of India will approve the names of coordinators for the panel discussion and debates in consultation with the Prasar Bharati Corporation.
The Commission, in the previous years, has worked out a schedule to provide different time slots for poll broadcasts to different parties.
Only the ‘national parties’ and ‘recognised state parties’ will be eligible to avail the facility of the broadcast and telecast time.
A base time of 45 minutes will be given to each party uniformly on the Regional Kendras of Doordarshan network and All India Radio network in the States/UT of Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Mizoram and NCT of Delhi. The additional time to be allotted to the parties has been decided on the basis of the poll performance of the parties in the last assembly election. The facilities will be available at the Regional Kendra of the All India Radio and Doordarshan in the states and then will be relayed by other stations within the states.
In a single session of broadcast, no party will be allotted more than 15 minutes.
The period of broadcast and telecast will be between the last days of filing the nominations and will end two days prior to the date of the poll. However, there will be no telecast or broadcast during the 48 hours before the polls close, as per specific provisions of the Representation of People Act, 1951.
Prasar Bharati, in consultation with the Commission, will decide the actual date and time for broadcast and telecast. This will be subject to the broad technical constraints governing the actual time of transmission available with the Doordarshan and All India Radio.
The guidelines prescribed by the Commission for telecast and broadcast will be strictly followed. The parties will be required to submit transcripts and recording in advance. The parties can get this recorded at their own cost in studios that meets the technical standards prescribed by Prasar Bharati, or at the Doordarshan/All India Radio Kendras.
Alternatively, they can have these recorded in the studios of Doordarshan and All India Radio by advance requests. In such cases, the recordings may be done at the State Capital and at timings indicated by Doordarshan/All India Radio.
Time Vouchers will be available in the denomination of five minutes with one voucher having time allotment from one to four minutes. The parties will be free to combine them suitably.
Introduced for the first time for the Lok Sabha elections in 1998, the scheme of free broadcasts was extended by the Commission to the State Assemblies held after 1998 and General Elections to the Lok Sabha in 1999, 2004 and 2009.
With the amendments in the Representation of People Act 1951, “Election and Other Related Laws (Amendment) Act, 2003”, and the rules notified in that, equitable time sharing for campaigning by recognised political parties on electronic media now has statutory basis.
In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of the Explanation below section 39A of the Representation of People Act, 1951, the Central Government has notified all such broadcasting media that are owned or controlled or financed wholly or substantially by funds provided to them by the Central Government, as the electronic media for the purposes of that section. Therefore, the Commission has decided to extend the said scheme of equitable time sharing on electronic media through Prasar Bharati Corporation to the ensuing General Elections to the State Legislative Assemblies.
High Court
Bombay High Court questions AI celebrity deepfakes in Shilpa Shetty case
Justice questions legality of unconsented AI personas, platforms directed to respond.
MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court just put AI on the witness stand because when a chatbot starts chatting as Shilpa Shetty without asking, even the bench wants to know who gave permission. The Bombay High Court on Wednesday expressed serious concerns over the legality of artificial intelligence tools that simulate celebrity personalities without consent, during a personality rights suit filed by actor Shilpa Shetty.
Justice Sharmila Deshmukh, hearing the matter, questioned platforms that allow users to interact with AI-generated versions of actors without authorisation. The court noted that one accused AI chatbot website continued using Shetty’s personality without permission, prompting the judge to ask about the legal basis for such operations.
When the lawyer for the AI company argued that the system relied on algorithms and did not require celebrity consent, Justice Deshmukh challenged the platform’s right to recreate and make public a person’s identity in this manner. She observed that while users uploading photographs raised one set of issues, AI systems generating content based on recognised personalities posed distinct legal and ethical questions especially when the platform itself acknowledged the content was not real.
The court directed the platform to file a detailed response explaining its position.
The case involves Shetty seeking restrictions on more than 30 platforms including e-commerce websites and AI services accused of hosting or enabling misuse of her image and circulation of deepfake content.
The Bench also raised concerns about Youtube commentary videos discussing the ongoing proceedings involving Shetty and her husband, questioning whether unverified discussions could malign parties without journalistic checks.
Counsel for Google, Tenor and the AI entity informed the court that flagged infringing URLs had been removed. Shetty’s team disputed this, leading the court to allow her to file an application alleging non-compliance if links remained active.
Tenor objected to the broad injunction sought, arguing it functions as an intermediary GIF platform without capacity for proactive monitoring. The court directed Tenor to file an affidavit opposing the order.
E-commerce platforms including Amazon stated they had removed unauthorised listings using Shetty’s name and image, and would continue to act on specific notifications.
The court reiterated that directions for intermediaries would operate on a “take-down on notice” basis, requiring removal of infringing content once flagged.
As deepfakes blur the line between real and rendered, the Bombay High Court isn’t just hearing a case, it’s asking the bigger question: in the age of AI avatars, who really owns your face?
