No One May Commercially Exploit Amitabh Bachchan’s Name, Image or Voice Without Permission, Rules Delhi High Court in Amitabh Bachchan v. Rajat Nagi
Case: Amitabh Bachchan v. Rajat Nagi and Others
Date of Judgment: 05 November 2026
Court: High Court of Delhi
Coram: Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav
Proceedings: CS (COMM) No. 819 of 2022
Court Observation
“The settlement has been agreed upon without fear or coercion, and the parties appear to have entered into it on their own volition.”
Summary
The Delhi High Court has decreed actor Amitabh Bachchan’s personality rights suit, permanently restraining multiple defendants from the unauthorised commercial use of his name, image, voice, likeness and other aspects of his persona. The decree covers eight identified defendants and extends to unidentified persons, known as John Does, in view of the continuing pattern of anonymous misuse of the actor’s persona through websites, applications, posters and messaging platforms.
Four defendants entered into a settlement with Bachchan, acknowledging his publicity rights and right to privacy, and the Court incorporated the settlement into a decree under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The suit was decreed against four other defendants under Order VIII Rule 10 of the Code after they failed to appear or file written statements despite service of summons. The ex parte ad-interim injunction granted on 25 November 2022 now stands merged with the decree, and Bachchan has been given liberty to institute fresh proceedings in the event of a fresh cause of action.
Key Holdings
- No person may commercially exploit Amitabh Bachchan’s name, image, voice, likeness or other identifiable aspects of his persona without his express permission.
- A settlement acknowledging the plaintiff’s publicity rights and right to privacy, entered into voluntarily and without coercion, is lawful and capable of being incorporated into a decree under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
- Defendants who fail to appear or file written statements despite service of summons may be decreed against ex parte under Order VIII Rule 10 of the Code, where no disputed question of fact requires trial.
- Where the plaint discloses a continuing pattern of anonymous misuse, the decree may operate against unidentified persons (John Does) as well as named defendants.
- The ad-interim injunction granted on 25 November 2022 stands merged with the final decree.
Background
Bachchan instituted the commercial suit in 2022 against persons and entities allegedly using his persona for commercial gain without authorisation, including a mobile application titled “Amitabh Bachchan Video Call”, a purported Kaun Banega Crorepati lottery circulated through WhatsApp messages, a general knowledge quiz book bearing his photograph, and T-shirts and posters carrying his images. The Court granted ex parte ad-interim protection on 25 November 2022. Some parties explored settlement, and on 9 October 2026 the Court deferred the hearing to 16 November 2026; with the settlement concluded and the remaining defendants not contesting, the suit was decreed on 5 November 2026 and the 16 November date was cancelled.
Judgment Link: Read the full judgment (PDF)
Related Articles
Disclaimer: This is a summary prepared for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Readers should refer to the official judgment for the authoritative text.
