The Delhi High Court on Tuesday deferred passing a comprehensive ex parte interim injunction in actor Janhvi Kapoor’s personality rights suit, observing that it could not grant a blanket takedown order covering 6,884 URLs without first examining the nature of the alleged infringements. A detailed interim order is awaited.
Hearing the matter, Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani observed that the plaintiff’s prayers were overbroad as they sought relief against thousands of URLs spanning varied categories, including pornographic content, AI-generated images, fan pages, impersonation accounts, sale of merchandise and allegedly misleading digital content. The Court directed the plaintiff to file a tabulated list identifying the URLs under specific categories before any wider ex parte relief could be considered.
The Court asked the plaintiff to separately identify content that is (i) ex facie pornographic, obscene, prurient or lascivious; (ii) directly monetising the plaintiff’s personality rights; and (iii) using her name and likeness to promote merchandise or services. Justice Bhambhani observed that these categories appeared to warrant immediate consideration, whereas other claims, including those relating to fan pages and allegedly misleading content, required closer scrutiny.
During the hearing, counsel for the plaintiff argued that numerous social media accounts, AI-generated images and fan pages were commercially exploiting Kapoor’s identity and diverting engagement from her verified accounts. The Court, however, questioned whether personality rights could justify restraining all fan pages or discussions relating to a public figure, observing that public personalities inevitably attract admiration, criticism and commentary. It also noted that concepts such as “misleading content” are inherently subjective and cannot be injuncted without proper examination.
Justice Bhambhani further observed that the expanding scope of personality rights litigation required careful judicial scrutiny and remarked that courts must bring some sanity to the jurisprudence instead of issuing sweeping takedown orders over thousands of URLs. The Court indicated that prima facie pornographic and obscene content identified by the plaintiff could be considered separately, while the remaining categories would require further adjudication.
The Court also directed the plaintiff to amend the memo of parties by impleading the correct GoDaddy entity and listed the matter on 17 August 2026 for further consideration.