Delhi HC Bars 8 Defendants From Using Amitabh Bachchan’s Identity

The Delhi High Court has drawn a clear line around Amitabh Bachchan’s star power. In a November 5 order, Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav barred eight named defendants, plus unidentified “John Does”, from using Bachchan’s name, photograph, voice, likeness or any element of his persona for commercial gain without authorisation.

Bachchan had sued over alleged misuse of his publicity rights and passing off, and had sought damages. The ruling closes that suit while keeping the door open for him to file fresh proceedings if another cause of action emerges.

What was being used without permission

The suit pointed to a continuing pattern of anonymous exploitation through websites, mobile applications, posters and messaging platforms. Specifically, it listed:

• An “Amitabh Bachchan Video Call” mobile app
• Fake Kaun Banega Crorepati lottery messages on WhatsApp
• A general knowledge quiz book carrying his photograph
• Posters and T-shirts featuring his images

Bachchan also took action against domain name registrants using his name. The concern, as the court saw it, was that such unauthorised use could mislead the public into believing he had endorsed the products or services being promoted.

Settled, and not contested

Four defendants, numbered 1, 3, 5 and 8, settled the dispute. They acknowledged Bachchan’s publicity rights and right to privacy, and agreed not to use his name, image, voice, likeness or any other aspect of his persona without his express permission.

The court accepted the settlement as voluntary and lawful, and incorporated it into the decree. “The settlement has been agreed upon without fear or coercion,” the court said.

The remaining four defendants, numbered 2, 4, 6 and 9, did not appear or file written statements despite summons. The court ruled against them under Order VIII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, noting that the provision should not be applied mechanically but that this matter did not involve disputed questions of fact requiring a trial.

Why this matters for fans

The order extends to John Does because online misuse is often carried out by people whose identities are hard to establish. That is the practical side of this ruling: a fake lottery message, a video-call app or a piece of unlicensed merchandise using Bachchan’s face is now on the wrong side of a court line.

For viewers, the simple rule is to verify before you click or buy. If a product, app or prize uses Bachchan’s face or name, treat it as unofficial unless it comes from a verified handle or an official brand page.

Source: The Times of India