Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Submit Guest Post

What prompted Kriti Sanon to seek legal protection for her identity?

Her plea covers the unauthorised use of her name, face, voice, photographs and videos

What prompted Kriti Sanon to seek legal protection for her identity?

The actor approached the Delhi High Court in India on October 16

Getty Images

Highlights

  • Bollywood actor Kriti Sanon has approached India’s Delhi High Court seeking protection for her personality rights.
  • Her plea covers the unauthorised use of her name, face, voice, photographs and videos, particularly for commercial purposes.
  • The court has asked her lawyer to submit legal research on personality rights before considering the matter further.

Bollywood actor Kriti Sanon has sought legal protection for her identity, bringing renewed attention to the rights of celebrities over how their names, images and voices are used.

The actor approached the Delhi High Court in India on October 16, seeking protection against the unauthorised use of her personality rights. The case concerns how elements of her identity, including her face, voice and image, can be used without her consent, particularly for commercial purposes.


The move comes as questions around celebrity identity and its use in advertising, online content and other commercial activities continue to draw attention.

What does Kriti Sanon want to protect?

Sanon’s plea concerns her personality rights, which can cover identifiable aspects of a person, including their name, likeness, voice, photographs and videos.

Her lawyer, Advocate Pravin Anand, told the court that these rights include protection against the unauthorised commercial use of such attributes without consent.

Personality rights are particularly relevant to public figures whose identities have commercial value. Their names, images and voices can be associated with products, promotions and digital content, making consent an important issue when those attributes are used commercially.

However, the court has not yet issued a comprehensive order in Sanon’s case.

What did the court say?

Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav asked Sanon’s lawyer to submit a compilation of relevant judgments and legal research explaining the scope of personality rights.

The court indicated that it would consider the material before passing a comprehensive order. The matter is scheduled to be heard again on October 29.

The request for further legal research means the court is still examining the issues raised by the actor’s plea. It should not be taken as a decision granting her the protection she has sought.

Other celebrities have sought similar protection

Sanon’s case comes amid a series of legal actions by Indian public figures seeking protection for their names, images and other identifiable attributes.

Several celebrities, including actors Kangana Ranaut, Tabu, Vijay Deverakonda, Allu Arjun, Mohanlal, Salman Khan and Aishwarya Rai Bachchan, have pursued personality-rights protection through the courts.

Other public figures, including cricketers Yuvraj Singh and Sunil Gavaskar, have also sought legal safeguards relating to the use of their identities.

The cases reflect growing legal attention to how public figures can protect their identities from unauthorised use. The outcome of Sanon’s plea will depend on the court’s consideration of the legal arguments and precedents submitted.

Add EasternEye As Your Trusted Source
preferred source on google news

More For You

Russell Brand arriving at Southwark Crown Court in London

British comedian, actor, podcaster, and media personality, Russell Brand arrives at Southwark Crown Court on October 14, 2026 in London, England. Russell Brand has been charged with three counts of rape, three counts of sexual assault and one count of indecent assault. He has denied all charges.

Getty Images

Russell Brand trial: why the documentary behind the case won't be shown to the jury

Highlights

  • The judge told jurors the allegations in the 2023 documentary have never been tested in any court, and that the film will not be shown to them
  • He said the defence may argue the programme caused the women to "twist" their memories, and described it as "one-sided and dramatic in manner"
  • Two of the complainants have now been cross-examined: the first on Thursday, another on Friday
  • Reuters says the trial is now expected to last around six weeks

The judge's ruling

At the start of Thursday's hearing, Mr Justice Bennathan turned to the programme at the centre of the case. All six complainants came forward after the 2023 documentary, he told the jury, and that is why it is relevant. According to Sky News, he told jurors the allegations featured in it have "never been tested in any court," and he warned that the defence may suggest it caused the women to "twist" their memory of events.

He also gave his own view of the film, calling it "one-sided and dramatic in manner," and ruled it would not be shown to the jury. The women whose accounts appeared in it but who are not part of this trial play no role in the case. In practice, the jury will weigh what it hears in court, not what was broadcast in 2023.

Keep ReadingShow less