In a suit filed by Akkineni Nagarjuna (Nagarjuna) seeking a permanent injunction before the Delhi High Court, which was heard by a Single Judge Bench of Justice Tejas Karia, the offending websites were strictly directed to take down the infringing content and restrained from using or exploiting any attribute of Nagarjuna unauthorizedly through the use of any technology that would dilute his public persona.
Nagarjuna filed the present suit to restrain the misappropriation of personality/publicity rights, infringement of performer’s rights, and passing off. It was stated that Nagarjuna was one of the most respected and acclaimed actors, producers, and entrepreneurs in the Indian film industry, having featured in over 95 movies. It was also submitted that his image as a respected public personality is a result of decades of hard work across fields.
Nagarjuna also submitted that he had established goodwill and a reputation for himself, which was evident from the millions of people following him on social media platforms. It was also contended that he had the exclusive rights to control the use of his name, likeness, image, persona, voice, mannerisms, gestures, and other uniquely identified characteristics associated with him.
The defendants in the matter included pornographic websites, their Domain Name Registrars (DNR), operators of websites that sold t-shirts using Nagarjuna’s name in an unauthorized manner, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MoEIT), as well as the Department of Telecommunications (DoT). Some unknown entities were also impleaded. Nagarjuna contended that the illegal and infringing content was easily accessible across India and that such unauthorized violations were causing him grave prejudice.
The Court made reference to Amitabh Bachchan v. Rajat Negi (2022) 6 HCC (Del) 641 and Aishwarya Rai Bachchan v. Aishwaryaworld.com & Ors. wherein the Court had granted an injunction to the plaintiffs on similar grounds.
The Court stated that the exploitation of one’s personality rights risks not only their economic interests but also their right to live with dignity, which causes them immeasurable harm, as the adoption of attributes such as a name or image inevitably confuses the public regarding endorsement by the plaintiff.
The Court found it clear that Nagarjuna’s attributes were being misused by defendants 1 to 13 and 20 without any authorization from him. It was stated that Nagarjuna is a celebrated personality in the entertainment industry and that his depictions in settings that are misleading, derogatory, and inappropriate would inevitably dilute the goodwill and reputation associated with him.
Accordingly, the websites, DNRs, and unknown entities, as well as all acting for and on their behalf, were restrained from violating Nagarjuna’s personality and moral rights. They were also restrained from passing off goods and/or services as if Nagarjuna had endorsed them. The Court further clarified that the defendants were restrained from using any attribute of Nagarjuna’s persona that was exclusively identified with him for any commercial and/or personal gain without his consent. The Court stated that such infringement should not take place through the use of any technological medium that would result in the dilution of Nagarjuna’s public persona.
The websites and DNRs were directed to disable the URLs within 72 hours and to submit all the basic subscriber information within two weeks. The MoEIT and DoT were directed to issue necessary directions to block and disable all URLs within 7 days.
The Court allowed for the reply to be filed within four weeks after service of notice and the case has now been listed on 23-01-2026.
Appearances –
For Plaintiff – Adv Pravin Anand, Sr. Adv Vaibhav Gaggar, Adv Vaishali R Mittal, Adv Vibhav Mithal, Adv Shivang Sharma, Adv Somdev Tiwari, Adv Abhishek Nair, Adv Vansh Shrivastav
For Defendant – Adv Yash Raj
