Delhi High Court Issues Interim Protection Order for Gautam Gambhir's Personality and Publicity Rights
Overview of the Judgment
The Delhi High Court recently delivered a significant ruling in the matter of Gautam Gambhir vs Ashok Kumar/John Doe & Ors in CS(COMM) 287/2026, pronounced on 25th March 2026, extending interim protection to the personality rights of Gautam Gambhir — presently serving as the Head Coach of the Indian Men's National Cricket Team and a celebrated former international cricketer. The Single Judge Bench of Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyoti Singh passed a comprehensive ex-parte ad interim injunction, restraining multiple named and unnamed defendants from exploiting Gambhir's name, image, voice, and likeness without his authorization.
The Court unequivocally recognized that unauthorized commercial exploitation of a public figure's identity — particularly through emerging technologies such as Artificial Intelligence, deepfakes, and generative AI tools — constitutes a direct infringement of that individual's personality and publicity rights. The judgment also addressed the unauthorized sale of merchandise bearing Gambhir's image on major e-commerce platforms, treating such activity as amounting to passing off and unlawful dilution of his established reputation.
Background and Procedural Context
The matter came before the Court on an application filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of CPC, seeking an ex-parte ad interim injunction on behalf of the plaintiff.
As recorded in para 36 of the judgment: "This application is filed on behalf of the Plaintiff under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of CPC for grant of ex-parte ad interim injunction."
During the course of the hearing, counsel for the plaintiff, on instructions, confirmed that the relief sought under Paragraph 67(v) of the plaint was not being pressed, and this statement was duly recorded by the Court (para 40).
Importantly, counsel representing Defendant No. 13 / Meta Platforms Inc. informed the Court that the majority of infringing links associated with Meta had already been rendered inaccessible, with the exception of a single profile URL which did not pertain to the subject matter of the suit. Meta further undertook to take down any additional infringing URLs upon receiving intimation from the plaintiff, in accordance with applicable law. A similar undertaking was offered by Defendant No. 15, who acknowledged that certain URLs were already inactive and committed to acting on any further infringing links upon being informed (para 41).
Who is the Plaintiff? — Establishing the Foundation for Personality Rights
Cricketing Achievements and Public Standing
The plaint placed extensive facts on record to establish the plaintiff's extraordinary stature, both nationally and internationally. As summarized by the Court in para 42 and 43: