Authored By: Nishtha
Amity University, Rajasthan
INTRODUCTION
Artificial intelligence (AI) has transformed and changed many fields like media, entertainment, education and cybersecurity. Among these deepfake technology is one of the most controversial creation of artificial intelligence. Deepfake technology makes it very easy to create any kind of fake audio, videos or photos that almost look real.[1]Although it is very useful in areas such as gaming, film making, media and other education and entertainment related things. But with that it also has serious downside. Deepfake technology with its highly realistic fabricated videos, photos, audios etc. can cause serious harm or threat to a person’s reputation, privacy or even is a threat to democratic processes and national security which is why government and legal systems are finding ways to regulate deepfake technology while also protecting freedom of speech and supporting technological innovations.[2]
Even though the technology was originally developed for research and knowledge purposes, it has become commonly accessible to the public. At present, anyone can create deepfakes or fake content with readily available software applications and technologies even with limited knowledge. This type of content is mainly used for defamation, blackmail, spreading misinformation and online fraud. Deepfake videos of celebrities, politicians and other public figures are created that lead to the circulation of fake information and influencing public opinion. Also, creation of non-consensual intimate content through this technology is very serious issue concerning privacy, consent and reputation.[3]
However, existing laws were not designed to deal with AI generated content or deepfake technology. This article focuses on legal concerns related to deepfakes and argues that current legal framework is inadequate to regulate this technology, and suggests reforms to address challenges posed by its misuse.
Legal framework governing deepfakes in India
Although Indian law doesn’t have explicit laws and framework related to regulation and penalization of deepfake, certain provisions of the Information Technology Act,2000(IT Act) and the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) can be applicable:
Information Technology Act (2000)
The Information Technology Act functions as India’s primary legislation governing digital activities. There are various legal provisions that can be invoked to deal with misuse of deepfakes.[4]
i) Section 66D of the IT Act, may apply where content generated by AI is misused to digitally impersonate another person with the intention of committing fraud. Under such circumstances the provision applies to the unlawful conduct instead of targeting the technology itself.[5]
ii) Section 66E of the IT Act, may become applicable where deepfake technology is used to generate, circulate private images without consent of the individual. This provision provides legal protection against the consequent violation of privacy.[6]
iii) Section 67 and 67A of the IT Act, may govern situations where deepfake technology is employed to fabricate or share obscene or sexually explicit content. These provisions criminalise the online publication and circulation of such material thereby making them relevant in matters concerning non-consensual synthetic intimate media. [7]
iv) Section 67B of the IT Act, may be invoked where deepfake technology is used to create or distribute child sexual abuse material in electronic form. The provision prohibits such digital content regardless of the manner through which it is produced or circulated.[8]
v) Section 69 of the IT Act, confers power to the central government to intercept, monitor and decrypt electronic data under specified conditions. Although the provision is not specifically designed to address deepfakes it may aid law enforcement authorities in detecting offences involving deepfake content. [9]
Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita,2023
Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita which is a replacement of IPC also has provisions that are relevant to deepfake offences. Sections like:
i) Section 356 (Defamation) relevant when deepfake content is used to harm a person’s reputation or social image.
ii) Section 79 (Insulting the modesty of a women) relevant when deepfake content is used to harm or degrade a women’s dignity.
iii) Section 78 (cyberstalking) relevant in certain situations when deepfakes are used to repeatedly harass an individual like stalking or defamation.
Also, offences like forgery, cheating, publication of false information, identity fraud may be invoked where deepfakes causes financial or reputational harms.[10]
Digital Personal Data Protection Act,2023:[11]
This act protects the personal data of people and makes sure that it is not used or collected without their consent. Deepfake content that is created using personal images, audios, videos of other people without their consent violate DPDP Act,2023.
However, this act does not particularly regulate the AI creation and deepfake generation but only deals with data collection and processing. DPTP does not cover all legal issues created by deepfakes and creates a legal gap. That is why a proper regulatory framework for AI generated and deepfake content is needed in India.
Constitutional Protection:
Deepfakes are a serious threat to the right to privacy, protected under Article 21 of the Indian constitution. Article 21 guarantees right to life and personal liberty to every individual.
In the landmark case of Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, it was held by the hon’ble Supreme Court that privacy is a fundamental right under Article 21. This means that every individual has rights over their personal information, images, videos and identity.
The unauthorized creation or publication of deepfake content may harm an individual’s privacy and dignity and violate Article 21.[12]
III. Case Law Analysis:
Several cases related to deepfakes have occurred in India but since there is no proper regulatory framework, courts adopt existing legal principles such as privacy rights, constitutional principles and personality rights and other common laws for dispute resolution that involve identity theft and digital impersonation.
Anil Kapoor v. Simply Life India & Ors. (2023)[13]
This case marks a significant development in legal framework related to artificial intelligence.
In this case, it was recognized by the Delhi High Court that personality rights of an individual can be violated due to AI generated content such as digital impersonation, voice cloning, fabricated videos, pictures, GIFs.
The court granted injunction to stop unauthorized use of Anil Kappor’s name, image, voice, videos and other personality elements as the court held that unauthorized use of AI generated content can harm and threaten an individual’s privacy and reputation in the public.
This judgement is noteworthy as it shows that although there is no specific law related to AI generated content, the courts are still open to apply existing legal principles to protect people. However, it also shows a gap in the legal framework and that the current legal framework is inadequate to deal with deepfakes due to lack of dedicated legislation and also the current protection cannot be equally effective for everyone. This is why there is a very high need for a separate law on deepfakes.
Kamya Buch v. JIX5A & Ors. (2025) [14]
This is one of India’s first cases that is directly dealt with sexually explicit AI generated deepfakes. The Delhi High Court delivered judgement on this case, the court ordered to remove all the explicit material after finding that its prima facie violated the reputation, privacy and dignity of the petitioner.
This case is significant as it addresses the serious social, reputational and emotional harm that can be caused by deepfakes. This case mainly focused upon protecting fundamental rights of an individual subjected to non-consensual fabricated material unlike other cases that were related to commercial exploitation.
However, this judgement also highlighted the limitations of current legal framework. Even though the court provided immediate relief through injunction, still no clear legal principles related to deepfakes were laid down. This shows the need for a proper legal framework related to these offences.
Critical evaluation and challenges related to deepfakes:
Lack of a dedicated legal framework:
One of the biggest hurdles in combating deepfakes is the absence of a proper legal framework in India. The existing laws like BNS, IT Act and others do not provide proper remedies needed as these rules were created before the emergence of deepfakes. These laws do not address several problems. For example, there is no direct prohibition or penalty for creation and distribution of deepfakes. Also, social media platforms also are not held strictly liable for distributing deepfakes. There are no fast-track remedies or existing laws to solve the problem of deepfakes.
Rapid advancement of technology:
As the technology is rapidly growing and the fact that AI evolves much faster than legislation. By the time new rules are enacted, AI modifies itself and becomes more advanced. Due to this gap is created between laws and technological development.
Threat to Privacy and reputation:
Deepfakes are a threat to an individual’s privacy, dignity and reputation since deepfakes are fabricated videos, audios, images of people without consent. Sexually explicit AI generated content can harm modesty and dignity of a women that can affect women psychologically, professionally and socially.
Difficult to detect:
Technology has become so advanced nowadays, modern AI can generate highly realistic content that are difficult to distinguish if real or fake. It is very difficult for even experts to identify deepfakes so ordinary people are more likely to be deceived through fake AI content.
Comparative perspectives:
The United States:
The United States has brought into force multiple state-specific laws addressing deepfakes primarily concerning elections and non-consensual intimate content, while federal measures emphasize research and accountability.[15]
China:
China has implemented stringent deepfake focused legal provisions mandating AI generated content to be appropriately marked and holding AI service providers accountable.[16]
Australia:
Australia combats unlawful deepfakes using digital security laws along with criminal penalties against the non-consensual generation or dissemination relating to artificially generated material.[17]
The European Union:
The European Union governs deepfakes under the GDPR, the AI act and the Digital Services act promoting transparency, privacy protection and intermediary obligation. [18]
Suggestion for Legal Reforms in India
The rising exploitation of deepfake technology reflects the necessity to reinforce India’s regulatory framework through tailored legal modifications. A key reform is to amend Copyright Act, 1957[19] to deal with unauthorized exploitation of intellectual creations in AI generated content. The legislation should specify extent of transformative use in the context of AI and ensure appropriate safeguards against the abuse of protected images, videos and audio content and other creative works. More precise copyright laws would protect the rights of copyright holders while fostering lawful AI development.
Legislative identity rights that safeguard an individual’s image, voice, resemblance and other personal characteristics from illegal use of deepfake technology should also be acknowledged by India. While penal sanctions may discourage particular crimes, they fail to provide complete compensation to victims for the damage caused to their confidentiality, reputation and dignity. Consequently, adequate civil remedies comprising damages and injunctions, should be incorporated to facilitate individuals to pursue timely legal protection against exploitation of identity.
Furthermore, Trade Marks Act, 1999[20]should be improved to deal with the abuse of trademarks, brand images and logos in deepfake content. Synthetic media may falsely represent sponsorships or associations, deceiving consumers and adversely affecting the goodwill of businesses. The law should mandate specific duties on digital platforms to swiftly detect such media and take down such content, thus protecting trademark owners.
Additionally, stronger emphasis should be directed towards data protection and confidentiality. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act,2023 lays down a crucial structure centered on consent, lawful handling of data and information security. Nevertheless, considering accelerated advancement of artificial intelligence, ongoing statutory amendments, comprehensive execution measures and advanced technical safeguards are crucial to guarantee that personal information is not misused for the generation and distribution of deceptive deepfakes.
VII. Conclusion:
Deepfake technology has emerged as one of the most notable developments in artificial intelligence. Despite the fact that it offers significant and legitimate applications in many sectors like media, education, healthcare, filmmaking and entertainment, its misuse causes serious legal and ethical issues too. Deepfakes may be misused for identity theft, impersonation and making of obscene or sexually exploited content without consent. This kind of exploitation can cause a serious threat to privacy, reputation, mental health and national security too.
Disputes related to deepfake technology in India are governed through existing legal frameworks such as the IT Act,2000, the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita,2023 and Digital Personal Data Protection Act,2023. These give partial remedies to solve the disputes related to synthetic media. However, these laws are not specifically made for addressing the challenges posed by artificial intelligence
There is a need for an effective legislation comprising stronger enforcement mechanisms, clear provisions, public awareness and platform accountability to deal specifically with the misuse of deepfakes in India. Simultaneously, these regulative measures should not hinder technical innovations or limit the lawful use of artificial intelligence. Hence, India should adopt a balanced approach in which both technological advancement is encouraged and individual rights are protected to effectively combat the issues regarding deepfake technology.
REFERENCE(S):
Cases:
Anil Kapoor v. Simply Life India & Ors., CS (COMM) 652/2023 (Delhi High Court 2023).
Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 1.
Legislation
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (India).
Copyright Act, 1957 (India).
Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (India).
Information Technology Act, 2000 (India).
Trade Marks Act, 1999 (India).
Foreign and International Materials
Provisions on the Administration of Deep Synthesis of Internet Information Services (China, effective Jan. 10, 2023).
Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 (General Data Protection Regulation).
Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 Laying Down Harmonised Rules on Artificial Intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act).
Online Safety Act 2021 (Cth) (Austl.).
Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) (Austl.).
Journal Articles
Robert Chesney & Danielle Keats Citron, Deep Fakes: A Looming Challenge for Privacy, Democracy, and National Security, 107 Calif. L. Rev. 1753 (2019).
Danielle Keats Citron, Sexual Privacy, 128 Yale L.J. 1870 (2019).
Masahiko Furuichi, Legal Challenges of Deepfakes in Japan, 52 IIC International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law 1123 (2021).
Reports
Law Commission and Scottish Law Commission, Automated Vehicles: Joint Report (Law Com No. 404, 2022).
[1] Robert Chesney & Danielle Keats Citron, Deep Fakes: A Looming Challenge for Privacy, Democracy, and National Security, 107 CALIF. L. REV. 1753, 1756-60 (2019).
[2] Id. at 1770-90.
[3] Danielle Keats Citron, Sexual Privacy, 128 YALE L.J. 1870, 1920-28 (2019).
[4] Information Technology Act, 2000 (India)
[5] Information Technology Act, 2000, § 66D (India).
[6] Information Technology Act, 2000, § 66E (India).
[7] Information Technology Act, 2000, §§ 67, 67A (India).
[8] Information Technology Act, 2000, § 67B (India).
[9] Information Technology Act, 2000, § 69 (India).
[10] Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, §§ 78, 79, 356 (India).
[11] Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (India).
[12] India Const. art. 21; Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 1 (India).
[13] Anil Kapoor v. Simply Life India & Ors., CS (COMM) 652/2023 (Delhi High Court 2023).
[14] Kamya Buch v. JIX5A & Ors., CS(OS) 465/2025, Delhi High Court (July 18, 2025).
[15] “Robert Chesney & Danielle Keats Citron, Deep Fakes: A Looming Challenge for Privacy, Democracy, and National Security, 107 Calif. L. Rev. 1753, 1779–85 (2019).”
[16] “Provisions on the Administration of Deep Synthesis of Internet Information Services (promulgated by the Cyberspace Administration of China, Dec. 11, 2022, effective Jan. 10, 2023) (China).”
[17] “Online Safety Act 2021 (Cth) (Austl.); Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) (Austl.).”
[18] “Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 Laying Down Harmonised Rules on Artificial Intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act); Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 (General Data Protection Regulation). “
[19] Copyright Act, 1957 (India).
[20] Trade Marks Act, 1999 (India).
