Amicus Curiae Proposes Changes to Personality Rights Litigation
Court-appointed advisor Gautam Bhatia has submitted a brief to the Delhi High Court, advocating for the separation of personality rights claims and limitations on broad injunctions.
Gautam Bhatia, serving as amicus curiae, has presented a detailed proposal to the Delhi High Court aimed at reshaping the landscape of personality rights litigation in India. In his 22-page brief, dated October 2026, Bhatia argues that "a stand-alone claim for personality rights — accompanied by a request for a broad-ranging John Doe/Ashok Kumar injunction — is a claim unknown to Indian law."
The proposal seeks to address concerns that broad injunctions requested in personality rights cases could be misused and unduly restrict free speech and other legitimate interests. Bhatia contends that "personality rights" actually encompass a bundle of distinct legal interests, such as protection against defamation, privacy, and the commercial exploitation of one's likeness, each requiring separate legal analysis and remedies.
Bhatia's brief comes amidst ongoing cases involving public figures, including actress Janhvi Kapoor, who have sought wide-ranging court orders against online content alleged to violate their personality rights. The court has previously expressed reservations about the potential for such broad injunctions, limiting interim protections to specific categories like obscene content or direct commercial appropriation of a persona.
The submission urges plaintiffs to clearly delineate each specific legal claim and advocates for courts to analyze these claims individually. Bhatia has proposed a four-question framework for evaluating such claims: identifying the legal interests being claimed, defining the nature of the alleged harm, determining the applicable legal remedies, and considering any countervailing rights. This approach aims to strike a balance between individual rights and broader public interests.