The Delhi High Court has passed a significant interim order safeguarding the personality rights of renowned Bollywood actor Anil Kapoor. The court’s decision restrains various entities from exploiting Kapoor’s image, name, voice, or other personal attributes for financial benefits without his explicit consent.
Justice Prathiba M Singh issued the order in response to Kapoor’s suit, which sought protection against the misuse of his personality rights. The actor’s plea specifically aimed to prevent entities, including John Does, from capitalizing on his name, acronym ‘AK’, popular nicknames like ‘Lakhan’, ‘Mr. India’, ‘Majnu Bhai’, the iconic phrase ‘Jhakaas’, and his distinct voice and images without his authorization.
Advocate Pravin Anand, representing Kapoor, emphasized the extent of the misuse, stating,
“Using technology people put Mahatma Gandhi with a gun, PM Modi as fat. … I am able to show these people are making money. Please see the image of Anil Kapoor as Katrina Kaif … There are images of Anil Kapoor as Sridevi. There are elements of tarnishment in that as well. Then there is his voice. There is refacing, photo morphing. They have a blank image you can substitute your image and make yourself stand next to Anil Kapoor. They are making money.”
Anand also highlighted that unauthorized parties are selling merchandise referencing Anil Kapoor and even falsely advertising his availability as a motivational speaker.
The court, however, initially expressed reservations about protecting the term “Jhakaas.” Justice Singh observed,
“This Jhakaas, you say it is Bambaiyya Hindi. If that is so, it can’t be protected.”
Anand responded, emphasizing the unique manner in which Anil Kapoor delivers the line,
“It’s about how he says it in a twisted way.”
The court also deliberated on the broader implications of granting such protection, noting,
“If we do it for one actor, then other actors, actresses, and celebrities will also be entitled to it.”
Anand countered,
“Depends, if they are being shamed, used for porn then yes, they will be entitled.”
The court acknowledged this perspective, stating,
“Then we will have to say that,”
before finalizing its order.
Justice Singh, in her order, emphasized the importance of safeguarding an individual’s personality rights, especially in the age of technology. She stated,
“Using a person’s names, voice, dialogue, image in an illegal manner that too for commercial purposes cannot be permitted. The celebrities’ rights of endorsement could be a major source of livelihood for the celebrity which can’t be completely destroyed by way of selling merchandise etc.”
The court’s decision underscores the evolving nature of personality rights in the digital age and sets a precedent for similar cases in the future.
Case Title: Anil Kapoor v. Simply Life India & Ors.
