By Tanveer Zaidi (Actor–Author–Educationist)
In a significant legal development that touches upon digital identity, personality rights, and online misrepresentation, the Bombay High Court on July 11, 2024, extended interim relief to renowned playback singer #SonuNigam, restraining a social media user from Bihar from misusing his name across social platforms.
The court order came in response to a civil suit filed by Sonu Nigam, who alleged that his name and persona were being used without authorisation for commercial exploitation and misrepresentation on social media.
The High Court’s ruling has set an important precedent, reinforcing the legal protections available to public personalities in the age of digital impersonation and rampant online misuse.
The Case: Misrepresentation and the Tort of Passing Off
According to the singer’s plea, he became aware in June 2024 of a social media account operated by a person named Sonu Nigam Singh, a resident of Bihar, who was using only the name “Sonu Nigam” as his display name.
This account had gained significant traction, amassing over 92,000 followers, including well-known public figures and national leaders, many of whom, the suit claims, were likely misled into believing the account was managed by the real Sonu Nigam.
The account in question also allegedly made controversial posts, which resulted in public backlash directed at the singer himself. This led to substantial reputational damage, even though he had no connection with the content being posted.
In his suit, Sonu Nigam cited violation of his personality rights, which include the exclusive right to his name, image, likeness, and persona — all of which fall under the broader domain of Intellectual Property Law and are protected by the Indian Constitution.
The suit was filed as a civil action of ‘passing off’, where the defendant was allegedly passing himself off as Sonu Nigam, thereby misleading the public and unlawfully benefiting from the goodwill associated with the celebrity’s name.
#PersonalityRights
#RightToPrivacy
#PassingOff
#OnlineImpersonation
Court’s Observations: Upholding the Right to Privacy
Delivering the interim order, Justice Riyaz Chagla of the Bombay High Court observed that the continued use of the name “Sonu Nigam” by the defendant amounted to misrepresentation. The judge held that such misuse was legally untenable and fell within the tort of passing off, warranting immediate restraint.
“I am of the view that the unauthorised use and/or commercial exploitation of (Sonu Nigam’s) name by Sonu Nigam Singh has not only associated the name and persona with ignoble acts but has also severely damaged Sonu Nigam’s reputation,” the judge stated.
The court further emphasised that even celebrities, who are constantly in the public eye, are entitled to their right to privacy, which includes the right to be left alone.
This right, Justice Chagla pointed out, is enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which guarantees protection of life and personal liberty.
#RightToBeLeftAlone
#Article21
#DigitalRights
Limitations of the Interim Relief
While Sonu Nigam had sought wide-ranging ex parte (without notice) relief against the defendant — including a comprehensive bar on using his name, image, or likeness in any manner — the High Court narrowed the scope of the injunction for the interim stage.
It granted relief specifically to the extent of restraining the individual from using “Sonu Nigam” as a display or account name on social media platforms.
Nevertheless, legal experts see this as a positive step toward recognising the dignity and autonomy of artists and public figures in the digital domain. The court also reinforced the principle that freedom of speech and expression, while fundamental, is not absolute. It must be balanced against the rights of others, particularly in cases where identity and reputation are at stake.
#FreedomOfExpression
#BalanceOfRights
#DigitalIdentity
Sonu Nigam’s Stance: Protecting Legacy and Integrity
Sonu Nigam, in his suit, maintained that his name has acquired immense commercial value, reputation, and public trust over the decades. He argued that it is not just a name but a brand, synonymous with credibility, talent, and professionalism in the music industry.
The unauthorized usage, therefore, not only harmed his reputation but also undermined the public’s trust. The singer asserted that his legal action was not merely a personal grievance but a stand against the growing menace of impersonation and digital misuse faced by public figures across sectors.
#CelebrityRights
#NameAsABrand
#FakeProfiles
Broader Implications: Celebrity Rights in the Social Media Era
This case sets a critical benchmark in the evolving legal landscape of digital rights, online impersonation, and personality protection. As social media continues to blur the lines between authenticity and anonymity, the judgment underscores the importance of legal frameworks that can safeguard individuals — especially celebrities — from malicious identity theft and unauthorised exploitation.
It also sends a strong message to impostors and digital impersonators: misusing a public figure’s identity is not just unethical, it is illegal and punishable under civil and constitutional law.
Stay tuned for further developments as the case proceeds in the Bombay High Court. For now, Sonu Nigam’s victory marks a milestone in the battle for digital dignity, privacy, and protection of one’s brand.
#SonuNigamVerdict
#CelebrityPrivacy
#FakeAccounts
#SocialMediaEthics
#BombayHighCourt
#DigitalLawIndia