In a surprising turn of events, the Delhi High Court has issued a notice to Bollywood superstar Salman Khan after a China‑based artificial intelligence voice‑generation platform filed a plea seeking to overturn an interim injunction that granted the actor exclusive personality rights. The notice, delivered on January 21, 2026, compels Khan to file a response within four weeks, with the next hearing slated for February 27.
Background and Context
On December 11, 2025, the Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction that effectively barred websites, mobile applications, and online sellers from using Salman Khan’s name, image, voice, or selling merchandise bearing his likeness without explicit consent. The injunction was a landmark decision in the evolving arena of personality rights, especially as AI technologies increasingly replicate human voices and likenesses.
In the wake of the injunction, a Chinese AI startup—specializing in voice‑modeling and synthetic media—filed an application to vacate the order. The platform argued that the injunction unduly restricted its legitimate business operations, which rely on generating AI‑based voice content for a range of commercial clients. The court’s decision to issue a notice to Khan underscores the delicate balance between protecting individual rights and fostering technological innovation.
Key Developments
Notice Issued to Salman Khan
- The Delhi High Court has formally notified Khan of the AI platform’s plea.
- Khan is required to submit a written response within 28 days.
- The next hearing is scheduled for February 27, 2026.
Scope of the Interim Injunction
- Prohibits unauthorized use of Khan’s name, image, voice, and related merchandise.
- Applies to all digital platforms, including e‑commerce sites and mobile apps.
- Enforces a strict compliance regime for entities that wish to use the actor’s persona.
AI Platform’s Argument
- Claims that the injunction hampers its core business of developing AI voice models.
- Requests the court to vacate the injunction, citing economic impact and freedom of expression.
- Highlights the need for a balanced legal framework that accommodates emerging technologies.
Impact Analysis
The case has far‑reaching implications for several stakeholders:
- AI Developers and Startups – The ruling signals that AI companies must navigate personality rights carefully, especially when replicating real voices. Failure to secure proper licenses could lead to legal challenges and injunctions.
- Digital Marketers and E‑Commerce Platforms – Businesses that rely on celebrity endorsements or branded merchandise must verify that they have explicit permission to use a personality’s likeness. The injunction sets a precedent that could tighten compliance requirements.
- Consumers and Fans – The ruling protects consumers from unauthorized or misleading use of a celebrity’s voice and image, ensuring authenticity in digital content.
- Students and Researchers – Those studying intellectual property law, AI ethics, or digital media will find this case a valuable case study on the intersection of technology and personality rights.
Statistically, the AI industry in India has seen a 35% year‑on‑year growth in 2025, with voice‑AI solutions accounting for 22% of that expansion. This surge amplifies the urgency for clear legal guidelines that reconcile innovation with individual rights.
Expert Insights and Practical Tips
Legal scholars and industry analysts emphasize the importance of proactive compliance:
- Obtain Explicit Licenses – Before using a celebrity’s voice or likeness, secure a written license that specifies scope, duration, and remuneration.
- Implement Robust Due Diligence – Conduct thorough background checks on the source of the voice model and verify authenticity to avoid infringing on personality rights.
- Adopt Transparent AI Practices – Clearly disclose when content is AI‑generated, especially if it mimics a real person’s voice or appearance.
- Stay Updated on Legal Precedents – Monitor court decisions related to personality rights and AI to anticipate regulatory changes.
- Engage Legal Counsel Early – For startups, early consultation with IP attorneys can prevent costly litigation and injunctions.
For students, this case offers a practical learning opportunity. Consider the following steps when exploring AI projects:
- Research existing personality rights laws in your jurisdiction.
- Draft a compliance checklist that includes licensing, disclosure, and data privacy considerations.
- Simulate a scenario where an AI model replicates a public figure’s voice and outline the legal steps required to use it ethically.
Looking Ahead
The outcome of the February 27 hearing could set a pivotal precedent for AI regulation in India. If the court upholds the injunction, it may reinforce stringent controls on AI‑generated content that mimics real personalities. Conversely, a partial or full vacatur could signal a more permissive stance, encouraging AI innovation but potentially raising concerns about misuse.
Regulators are already hinting at forthcoming guidelines. The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) has announced a draft policy on “Responsible AI Use” slated for release in Q3 2026. This policy is expected to address issues such as consent, transparency, and accountability in AI‑generated media.
Industry stakeholders should prepare for a regulatory environment that balances technological advancement with individual rights. Companies may need to invest in compliance teams, develop AI ethics frameworks, and engage with policymakers to shape future legislation.
In the broader context, the case underscores the growing importance of personality rights in the digital age. As AI continues to blur the lines between real and synthetic content, legal frameworks must evolve to protect both creators and consumers.
Reach out to us for personalized consultation based on your specific requirements.
