Delhi HC Indicates Interim Injunction in Karan Johar’s Plea To Protect His Personality Rights

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday, September 17, 2025, indicated that it would pass an interim injunction in filmmaker and producer Karan Johar’s plea seeking protection of his personality and publicity rights. Johar has moved the High Court against defendant entities allegedly using his name, image, and likeness without authorisation or consent for commercial gain.

Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora heard the matter briefly and indicated that she would be passing a detailed order. The Court recorded: “Register the suit and issue summons. Basic Subscriber Information (BSI) will be provided by Defendants 14, 15, and 16, along with IP log records. Summons are to be issued to Defendants 2, 5, 7, 9 and 10. I will pass a detailed order; injunction to be granted.”

At the outset, the Court observed that the plaint filed by Johar had “frustrated” it. Senior Advocate Rajshekhar Rao, appearing for Johar, responded that they were only there to assist the Court.

Appearing for Meta, Advocate Varun Pathak clarified that he was not raising technical objections to the plaint but flagged the difficulty of granting a dynamic injunction, stressing that not all of the content being shared pertained to Johar.

Rao, however, argued that Johar was being subjected to public ridicule, including innuendos about his orientation. Making the Court go through the comments, Rao said, “My Ladyship, you may have page 9, comments on my sexuality, please see the tenth. This one is about another senior actor, a Member of Parliament. The next comment is against me on nepotism.”

“Do I not have the right to prevent someone from misusing my attributes?” Rao asked, adding that while fair comment or even some ridicule may be tolerated, what was happening had become a trend. He stressed that Johar had looked the other way “hundreds and thousands of times.”

On Monday, the Court had first asked Senior Advocate Rajshekhar Rao, appearing for Karan Johar, to identify infringing URLs and re-listed the matter for 4 PM.

When the hearing resumed, Rao placed before the Bench several links allegedly selling merchandise and carrying infringing content. He argued that Johar was entitled to call upon respondents to take down any channel using his name, likeness, or voice without authority. Rao submitted that while fair comment and some ridicule may be tolerated, the circulation of memes had “crossed limits” and infringed Johar’s right to privacy.

Appearing for Meta, Advocate Varun Pathak countered that much of the flagged content was satire or commentary on nepotism, adding that an injunction against such material would set a precedent. He argued that the Court must distinguish between disparagement and fair use, adding that some remarks were “mere comments protected under Article 19. After hearing both sides, Justice Arora observed that two items in the plaint were “not in good taste” and amounted to disparagement and obscenity, not satire.

 Johar has specifically sought directions restraining several websites and online platforms from selling merchandise such as mugs, t-shirts and other products carrying his name, image and likeness. He contended that such unauthorised actions not only violate his publicity rights but also amount to misrepresentation before the public.

Johar’s plea comes after actors Aishwarya Rai Bachchan and Abhishek Bachchan filed similar petitions in the Delhi High Court, saying their names and photographs were being misused on products and online platforms without permission.

Court had restrained defendants from misappropriating Aishwarya Rai Bachchan’s name, image or likeness and from passing off goods as if endorsed by her.

Similar relief was extended to Abhishek Bachchan, with the Court holding that misuse of his identity through technology in misleading or derogatory contexts intruded upon his privacy and dignity.

A detailed copy of the order will be uploaded on the Court’s website.

Case Title: Karan Johar v. Ashok Kumar/John Doe & Ors

Hearing Date: 17 September 2025

Bench: Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora