Delhi High Court Protects Personality Rights of Preacher Aniruddhacharya; Restrains Unauthorized Use of ‘Pookie’ Baba Persona

The Delhi High Court has passed a significant interim order protecting the personality rights of popular preacher Aniruddhacharya, widely known on social media as ‘Pookie’ Baba. Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, presiding over the matter on March 30, restrained various entities from the unauthorized use of the preacher’s name, voice, image, and persona for creating memes, videos, or any other content, including AI-generated and deepfake material.

The court further directed major social media platforms, including Meta, X (formerly Twitter), and Google, to remove the offending content identified by the plaintiff that unlawfully used or imitated his persona.

The lawsuit was filed by Aniruddhacharya, who alleged that several entities were misappropriating his personality attributes without any authorization, license, or consent. According to the plaintiff, these actions were driven by an “ulterior motive of deriving illegal commercial gain” and “free-riding” upon his established goodwill and reputation.

Counsel for the preacher submitted that deceptive and fabricated content was being circulated to falsely suggest Aniruddhacharya’s endorsement of fraudulent schemes and spurious goods. The lawyer emphasized that the distortion of his teachings in these posts not only resulted in a loss of goodwill among his followers but also carried the potential to mislead the general public.

Upon reviewing the materials, Justice Tushar Rao Gedela opined that there was a strong prima facie case in favor of the plaintiff, recognizing him as a “well-known, popular and well-accepted personality.”

READ ALSO  Mumbai Court Orders Police Inquiry into Reporter's Defamation Claim Against Raveena Tandon

Crucially, the court distinguished the flagged content from protected forms of expression. The court stated that the nature of the content was not “mere parody” and instead appeared to be “disparaging and infringing his personality rights.”

The court further observed that the apprehension of “dent and damage to the image and personality of the plaintiff” appeared to be “real and present,” necessitating judicial intervention to prevent further unauthorized commercial exploitation of his identity.

READ ALSO  Where a Marriage has been Wrecked Beyond the Hope of Salvage, Public Interest lies in the Recognition of that Fact: Kerala HC
Ad 20- WhatsApp Banner

Law Trend
Law Trendhttps://lawtrend.in/
Legal News Website Providing Latest Judgments of Supreme Court and High Court

Related Articles

Latest Articles