Delhi HC Refuses to Stay “Doosra”, Will Watch Film in Sourav Ganguly’s Personality Rights Suit
The Delhi High Court has declined to stay the release of the film “Doosra” in a suit by former India captain Sourav Ganguly and Luv Films LLP alleging unauthorised commercial use of his personality, identity and achievements. On October 22, Justice Dinesh Bhatt refused interim relief ahead of the film’s October 23 theatrical release.
The plaintiffs argued no licence was taken, about a third of the trailer features Ganguly, and the film undermines the exclusive biopic rights Luv Films obtained in 2021. The defendants countered that it is not a biopic but a fictional story inspired by Ganguly, with NatWest series footage duly licensed. On October 23, the Court asked the producers to arrange a screening to decide the claim, while refusing to stay the OTT release.
You can read more about it here and here.
Bombay HC Halts Release of “Tu Hai Meri Kiran” Pending INR 8.85 Crore Deposit
The Bombay High Court has restrained the theatrical release of the Hindi film “Tu Hai Meri Kiran”, starring Sonakshi Sinha and Zaheer Iqbal, until co-producer Echelon Productions deposits ₹8.85 crore with 15% interest. Justice Amit Borkar passed the interim order on October 19 under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, on a plea by co-producer AND Movie Products LLP, which said its investment under a March 2024 co-production agreement was never refunded despite an expired timeline and a dishonoured cheque.
Rejecting the argument that AND Movie had acquiesced by promoting the film on Instagram, the Court held that social media promotion does not waive financial claims or exploitation rights. Echelon must deposit the amount within three working days, disclose all third-party exploitation agreements, and restore agreed producer credits within forty-eight hours.
Case Title: AND Movie Products LLP v. Echelon Productions & Ors.
You can read more about it here and here.
Delhi HC Restrains Restaurant From Using “Benne” Trademark
The Delhi High Court has granted an ex parte ad interim injunction restraining a Delhi-based restaurant from using the marks “BENNE” and “BENNE DELHI”, or any identical or deceptively similar mark, in a trademark suit filed by Shimow Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. Justice Vikas Mahajan held that the plaintiff had made out a prima facie case, the balance of convenience favoured it, and it would otherwise suffer irreparable injury.
Shimow conceptualised the Benne brand in 2023-24, drawing on Bengaluru’s Darshini restaurant culture, and runs five South Indian outlets across Mumbai and Delhi NCR. It argued the mark had acquired substantial goodwill and that Benne Delhi, discovered in August 2026 offering identical cuisine, could mislead consumers. The injunction operates until the next hearing on February 9, 2027.
Case Title: Shimow Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. v. M/s Benne Delhi.
Case No: CS(COMM) 1131/2026
You can read more about it here.
I&B Ministry Cautions TV Channels Against AI Misuse, Calls for Stronger Editorial Oversight
The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting has issued an advisory to private satellite TV channels, flagging non-compliance with the Programme Code under the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 and the Cable Television Networks Rules, 1994, and warning that violations could invite action.
Channels were asked to exercise due caution while using AI, including generative AI, for graphics, virtual news presentations and other programming. AI may be used only in an assistive capacity, without compromising the accuracy, authenticity or sensitivity of news content.
Broadcasters were also advised to strengthen editorial and content-review mechanisms, train staff on the Programme Code, carefully select and sensitise debate panellists to prevent communal or anti-national content, avoid live coverage of anti-terror operations, and use only authentic Survey of India maps.
You can read more about it here.
Delhi HC Decrees Arjun Kapoor’s Personality Rights Suit, Orders Takedown of Infringing Links
The Delhi High Court has decreed actor Arjun Kapoor’s suit seeking protection of his personality and publicity rights against unauthorised commercial exploitation on online platforms, including social media and YouTube. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav noted that the defendants filed no written statements or affidavits disputing the documents, treated the plaint’s averments as admitted, and found no question of fact requiring trial.
An earlier interim order had restrained several defendants from misusing his name, image and likeness, including through AI, deepfakes and face morphing. The Court directed the authorities to take down the remaining infringing links and made the interim directions absolute against several defendants. Kapoor may approach intermediaries with newly discovered URLs, which platforms must examine independently under their policies.
Case Title: Arjun Kapoor v. Artist Booking Company & Ors.
Case No: CS(COMM) 454/2026
You can read more about it here.
Delhi HC: GAC Cannot Reject Account Suspension Appeals for Want of Information From Platforms
The Delhi High Court has held that the Grievance Appellate Committee (GAC), established under the IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, cannot dispose of user appeals merely because social media intermediaries fail to provide information. Justice Amit Mahajan observed that the Committee has sufficient powers to direct intermediaries to supply information and justify why content or an account was removed or suspended.
The petitioner challenged Meta’s suspension of his Instagram account in June 2026. The GAC had disposed of his appeal on September 22, noting that Meta’s explanations lacked clarity. After Meta undertook to provide the information within two days, the Court restored the appeal and directed the GAC to pass an appropriate order expeditiously.
Case Title: Prakash Kumar Singh v. Union of India & Ors.
Case No: W.P.(C) 15044/2026
You can read more about it here.
Kriti Sanon Moves Delhi HC Seeking Protection of Her Personality Rights
Actor Kriti Sanon has approached the Delhi High Court seeking protection of her personality rights. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav asked her counsel, Advocate Pravin Anand, to file a compilation of judgments and research material on what falls within personality rights, indicating that a comprehensive order would follow.
Anand submitted that personality rights cover a person’s voice, face, image, photo or video and name, including commercial use of a face without consent, and that no jurisdictional issue arises. The Court has recently protected the personality rights of several public figures, including Kangana Ranaut, Tabu, Shashi Tharoor and Sunil Gavaskar. The matter will next be heard on October 29.
Case Title: Kriti Sanon v. BBE Marketing Inc & Ors.
You can read more about it here.
CBFC Data Breach Exposes Confidential Documents Linked to Over 500 Film Titles
A data breach involving India’s Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) has reportedly exposed documents linked to more than 500 film titles, raising serious concerns over data security and confidentiality in the film industry. According to an investigation by The Hindu, files allegedly linked to the CBFC’s e-Cinepramaan portal were accessible online, including shooting scripts, censor cut orders, certification records and confidential distribution agreements. The exposed documents reportedly included agreements for the Brazilian film The Secret Agent and the Hollywood film Good Luck, Have Fun, Don’t Die, with at least three contracts revealing licensing fees and other commercially sensitive terms that could weaken negotiations between producers and distributors. The documents were reportedly available on the Internet Archive before being removed. The CBFC has stated that its initial checks found no trace of the claimed unauthorised access and that it is investigating the incident, conducting a security audit and notifying cybercrime authorities and India’s Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT-In). The full extent and cause of the exposure remain unclear, highlighting the need for stronger cybersecurity safeguards to protect filmmakers’ creative work and confidential business information.
Read more here
CCPA Fines Britannia INR 1 Lakh Over Misleading ‘100% Whole Wheat Bread’ Claim
India’s Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) has imposed a INR 1 lakh penalty on Britannia Industries for misleading consumers by marketing its bread as “100% Whole Wheat Bread” despite whole wheat flour accounting for only around 62% of the product’s composition. In an order dated October 22, 2026, the regulator held that the claim, reinforced by the “0% Maida” label, created a misleading impression about the bread’s ingredients and nutritional characteristics. Food labelling regulations require at least 75% whole wheat flour for a product to be described as “Whole Wheat Bread”. Britannia argued that its “100%” claim referred to the purity of the wheat flour used and the absence of refined flour, but the CCPA rejected this interpretation, stating that the claim suggested the entire product was made from whole wheat flour. The authority also directed the company to immediately withdraw the misleading advertisements across print, electronic and social media and submit a compliance report within 15 days. The ruling underscores regulators’ growing scrutiny of absolute claims on food packaging and reinforces the obligation of food companies to ensure that marketing statements accurately reflect product composition and do not mislead consumers.
Read more here
