High Court
Star-TRAI case suffers as another judge withdraws in Madras HC
MUMBAI: The TRAI tariff standoff with Star India, which is pending before the Madras High Court, seems to have hit another roadblock.
It has been learnt that another judge — Justice Govind Rajan — on Monday recused himself from the case. Star India SVP – legal and regulatory Pulak Bagchi confirmed while speaking to www.indiantelevision.com that he has withdrawn citing personal reasons. To a question, Bagchi said that the case may be referred to another bench in 2-3 days.
In the first week of April, the case by Star India and Vijay TV challenging the jurisdiction of TRAI in the matter of tariff orders took a surprising turn when Justice S Nagamuthu and Justice Anita Sumanth recused themselves.
Though it was not clear, it appeared that the two judges had received a letter which prompted them to withdraw from the case. The petition had been filed by Star India and Vijay TV under the Copyright Act on the ground that TRAI could not give any directive that will affect the content since that did not fall in its purview.
Meanwhile, counsel opined that, as the pleadings were completed, the new bench will get down to hearing the arguments. Arguments had commenced on behalf of the Union Government until lunch that day and the matter was thereafter adjourned.
Star India and Vijay TV had decided not to press for their pleas for extension of the tariff order following TRAI’s announcement that its tariff regulations which were slated to come into effect on 2 April were being deferred to 2 May 2017.
Now, it is up to the chief justice of the Madras High Court to nominate another bench to hear the case as the recusing judge had written to the CJI that the matter was important and a new bench should be identified on an urgent basis to dispose of the case.
Also Read :
Star – TRAI copyright case: In dramatic turn, Madras HC judges withdraw
Coordinate with registry for mentioning TV tariff matter, says Madras HC CJ
TRAI extends tariff regulations execution date, Madras High court arguments to continue
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.
