The Delhi High Court issued an order safeguarding the personality and publicity rights of actor Jackie Shroff, restraining various entities including social media accounts, AI chatbots, and e-commerce platforms from exploiting Shroff's name, voice, or image for commercial purposes without his consent.

Shroff's plea aimed to safeguard various identifiers including "Jackie Shroff", "Jackie", "Jaggu Dada", and "Bhidu", asserting that their unauthorized use without his consent on any platform should be prohibited. He argued that such unauthorized exploitation not only generates profit for third parties but also causes confusion and damages his reputation.

A Bench of Justice Sanjeev Narula held, “the Plaintiff has established a prima facie case for grant of an ex-parte injunction. Balance of convenience lies in his favour and against the Defendants Nos. 3-4, 6-7, 13 and 14. If an injunction is not granted in the present case, it will lead to irreparable loss/harm to the Plaintiff, not only financially but also with his right to live with dignity.”

Advocate Pravin Anand appeared for the Petitioner and Advocate Sharat Kapoor appeared for the Respondents.

Recognizing Shroff's status as a celebrity, the Court emphasized his entitlement to certain rights regarding his persona and associated attributes. Several defendants, including gif making platforms and a restaurant named ‘Bhidu’, were cited for allegedly infringing on Shroff's personality rights and misusing his persona. Initially seeking injunction against these defendants as well, Shroff's counsel later suggested that the Court evaluate their response before issuing orders.

However, the Court declined to order the removal of a video titled ‘Jackie Shroff is Savage, Jackie Shroff Thug Life’ posted on the YouTube channel Thugesh, deeming it a form of artistic expression. The Court highlighted concerns about setting a precedent that could restrict freedom of expression.

The Court however directed,

“Accordingly, till the next date of hearing-

  • Defendant Nos 1 and 2 are held bound by the statements made by their respective counsels. Defendant Nos. 3-4 and/or persons claiming through them, are restrained from infringing the Plaintiff’s personality/publicity rights by utilizing/exploiting/misappropriating the Plaintiff’s (a) name ‘JACKIE SHROFF” and other sobriquets including “JACKIE”, “JAGGU DADA”, (b) voice; (c) image; for any commercial purpose without the Plaintiff’s consent and/or authorization.
  • Defendant Nos. 6-7- and/or persons claiming through them are Page 15 of 18 CS(COMM) 389/2024 restrained from infringing the Plaintiff’s personality/publicity rights by distorting videos of the Plaintiff which tarnishes the reputation of the Plaintiff and violates his moral rights for any commercial purpose, without the Plaintiff’s consent and/or authorization.
  • Defendant No. 13 and/or persons claiming through it from infringing the Plaintiff’s personality/publicity rights by commercially using an unlicensed Al chatbot that uses attributes of the Plaintiff’s persona without the Plaintiff’s consent and/or authorization, including on formats and mediums like the Artificial Intelligence.
  • Defendant No. 14 and/or persons claiming through it are restrained from infringing the Plaintiff's personality/publicity rights by utilizing/exploiting/misappropriating the Plaintiff’s (a) name ‘JACKIE SHROFF’ and other sobriquets including “JACKIE”, ‘JAGGU DADA’ and (b) image for making available for download a wallpaper for any commercial purpose in any manner whatsoever without the Plaintiff’s consent and/or authorization.
  • Defendant No. 16/ Department of Telecommunications (DoT) and Defendant No. 17/the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) are directed to issue necessary directions to the telecom service providers and internet service providers to the block the infringing URLs/ links, which are mentioned in Annexure attached to this order (Annexure-A) of this order.”

The matter is set to be heard next on October 15.

Cause Title: Jaikishan Kakubhai Saraf Alias Jackie Shroff v. The Peppy Store & Ors., [2024:DHC:4046]

Appearance:

Petitioner: Advocates Pravin Anand, Ameet Naik, Dhruv Anand, Madhu Gadodia, Udita Patro, Rinku Gajria, Sampurnaa Sanyal, Sujoy Mukherjee, Ashotosh Upadhyaya, Nimrat Singh, Tarini Kulkarni and Dhananjay Khanna

Respondents: Advocates Sharat Kapoor, Shubh Kapoor, Anirudh Dusaj and Bhavyah Garg, Shikha Sachdeva, Kriti Rathi and Annie Jacob, Aditya Narayan Mahajan and Kara Aggarwal, Shruttima Ehersa, Rohan Ahuja, Diva Viswanath and Rahul Choudhary
Click here to read/download Judgment


Delhi High CourtJustice Sanjeev Narula

Suchita Shukla