DEEPFAKES AND LAW: ADDRESSING THE LEGAL VACUUM IN SYNTHETIC MEDIA REGULATION

ABSTRACT

The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) and its accessibility has led to a proliferation of synthetic media. Deepfake, a term that originated in the 21st century, is a subset of the same. Synthetic media, or false media, can manipulate images, audio, and video content and can depict an individual saying or doing things they have never done. This significantly poses threats to an individual’s privacy, reputation, security, etc.

While a complete legal vacuum for deepfakes has largely emerged and has been filled by applying various existing laws (e.g., those related to defamation, fraud, obscenity, and privacy), it offers partial and only reactive remedies. Furthermore, there is a need to enhance public awareness and understanding of the concept to ensure its effective implementation. This article maps the current legal landscape (with an Indian focus) and diagnoses the gaps between law and enforcement, judicial precedents, statutory provisions, and challenges.

INTRODUCTION

As per MERRIAM WEBSTER’S DICTIONARY, “deepfake” means “an image or recording that has been convincingly altered and manipulated to misrepresent someone as doing or saying something that was not actually done or said^[1].” They are highly images, videos, and audio clips generated by using AI (artificial intelligence). This technology supports advanced machine techniques, particularly Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs).

The term originated in 2017, when AI was used for creating and sharing the videos featuring the faces of celebrities imposed on the bodies of the performers in adult films. Since then, the technology has evolved rapidly. As of now, it has become more sophisticated and accessible, due to which it has become a challenge to distinguish between real and fake content. This evolution has majorly impacted sectors where authenticity of information is paramount, such as politics, law and enforcement, media, etc. Deepfake has become a real threat to the society, especially to celebrities and women.

THE LEGAL VACUUM IN INDIA

Despite the severity of the threat, India does not have any deepfake laws, particularly. However, some existing laws and regulations address harm caused by synthetic media or false media:

1. THE DIGITAL PERSONAL DATA PROTECTION ACT, 2023 (DPDPA): regulates the processing of personal data and sets obligations for entities processing personal data. It protects the personal data of an individual and places accountability on the fiduciaries; ^[2]it does not directly criminalize the creation of synthetic media or set specific obligations for more AI model disclosure.
2. IT ACT AND INTERMEDIARY RULE: Section 66D IT Act which deals with cheating by impersonation using computer resources, is specifically relevant for deepfake cases. ^[3]This section criminalizes identity impersonation by using computer resources, carrying a punishment of 3 years imprisonment and a fine of up to 1 lakh.
3. BHARTIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023: The BNS has refined many of the sections that provide protection from deepfakes. Section 336 of BNS deals with forgery, Section 356 with criminal intimidation, and Section 354C with voyeurism, and cheating has been used for deepfakes.

Taken together, these tools give victims some remedies—takedowns, civil suits for personality rights, and criminal prosecution in narrow cases—but they do not comprehensively deter or regulate the production, dissemination, and commercial use of malicious synthetic media.

ETHICAL AND LEGAL CHALLENGES

The following are the challenges of the deepfake technology. These challenges complicate the effective governance and mitigation of deepfake-related threats.

1. FREE SPEECH vs. REGULATION: Any attempt to regulate deepfakes must reconcile Article 19(1)(a) (freedom of speech) with reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2). ^[4]The deepfake phenomenon continues to exist within the legal grey zone; criminalizing them entirely could lead to censorship, parody, and political expression.
2. PROOF AND ATTRIBUTION: Identifying the creator, determining the intent, and authenticating manipulated evidence are some evidentiary challenges. The technological complexities of deepfake complicate attribution. Traditional rules need to be updated to accommodate AI forensics.^[5]
3. PLATFORM RESPONSIBILITY: Social media platforms are often the first point of dissemination. Mandating algorithm surveillance could raise privacy and free speech concerns, but complete immunity encourages negligence. Hence, a balanced duty of care approach is needed.
4. CROSS-BORDER ENFORCEMENT^[6]: Deepfake creators often operate from foreign jurisdictions, using virtual private networks or hosting platforms outside India. Without mutual assistance and international cooperation, enforcement remains ineffective.

THE WAY FORWARD: BRIDGING THE LEGAL VACUUM

To combat the misuse of deepfake technology more effectively, several recommendations can be considered:^[7]

1. NEED FOR A DEDICATED “DEEPFAKE REGULATION” LAWS: India requires a specific legislative framework for protection against deepfakes and explicitly defines and penalizes malicious deepfake activity. Specific legislation will enhance the ability of law enforcement to address deepfake crimes effectively.
2. INSTITUTIONAL AND TECHNICAL MEASURES:

• National Centre for Synthetic Media Forensics: Establishment of a specialized unit under CERT-In, the Ministry of Electronics and IT, to develop an AI detection tool and certify authenticity reports admissible in court.
• Digital literacy initiative: public awareness campaigns to educate citizens on identifying and reporting deepfakes.
• Judicial and law enforcement training: workshops for judges, prosecutors, and cyber investigators on the evidentiary handling of AI-generated content.

3. AMENDMENTS TO THE EVIDENCE AND IT ACTS: The BSA should include the provisions recognizing certified AI-based authenticity reports as admissible digital evidence. The IT Act should also be amended to impose a “duty of reasonable verification” on the intermediaries hosting synthetic media.
4. PUBLIC AWARENESS: Educating citizens about the potential dangers of deepfakes and how to recognize them is important. Public awareness campaigns should be expanded to reach a broader audience and provide clear guidance on how to report and respond to deepfake incidents. Enhancing digital literacy will empower individuals to protect themselves from deepfake-related harms.

BALANCING INNOVATION AND PROTECTION

Deepfake technology is not inherently evil itself; it can be used for good. Filmmakers use it for dubbing and restoration, educators for stimulation, and accessibility developers for voice reconstruction. The challenge lies not in banning the technology but in regulating its misuse. Overcriminalization risks stifling creativity, while under regulation endangers democracy and individual dignity. The goals should be a balanced, principle-based framework rooted in transparency, accountability, and proportionality.

RECENT CASES

ANIL KAPOOR VS. SIMPLY LIFE INDIA & ORS (2023):^[8]

Bollywood actor Anil Kapoor filed a lawsuit before the Delhi High Court against multiple defendants for the unauthorized commercial exploitation of his personality rights. The court granted an ex-parte injunction in his favor, recognizing his rights over his name, image, voice, and overall persona. The defendants were found to have misused these attributes by creating deepfakes and AI-generated content and selling merchandise bearing his likeness without consent. The court not only restrained further unauthorized use but also directed the blocking of infringing links and the transfer of cybersquatted domain names such as www.anilkapoor.in to the actor. This judgment marks a landmark precedent in India, reinforcing the legal protection of celebrity personality rights in the age of synthetic

media and AI-driven exploitation.

AMITABH BACHCHAN V. RAJAT NEGI AND ORS. (2022)^[9]

The Delhi High Court once again addressed the issue of unauthorized exploitation of celebrity personality rights through deepfake technology. The plaintiff, Amitabh Bachchan, sought protection against the misuse of his name, image, voice, and likeness by the defendants, who had created and disseminated deepfake videos and other manipulated content without consent. The court observed that such acts constituted a violation of the plaintiff’s personality rights, right to privacy, and publicity rights, particularly when the content was used for commercial gain or in a derogatory context. Consequently, the court issued an interim injunction restraining the defendants from further misuse and directed the removal of all deepfake and infringing content from online platforms. This decision serves as a significant precedent in combating the misuse of AI-generated and synthetic media, emphasizing judicial recognition of personality rights in the digital age.

CONCLUSION

Deepfakes epitomize the dilemma of modern technology—empowering yet perilous. As India accelerates toward digital governance and AI innovation, it cannot afford a legislative lag. The absence of a specific legal framework leaves individuals vulnerable to identity manipulation and reputational harm, while eroding public faith in truth itself.

By introducing a comprehensive Deepfake Regulation Law, supported by amendments to the IT Act, Evidence Act, and Data Protection Law, India can create a robust and future-ready regime. Simultaneously, collaboration between government, technology companies, and civil society is essential to maintain ethical AI practices and enhance digital literacy.

Ultimately, the law must evolve not to restrain innovation but to preserve authenticity, dignity, and accountability in an age where the line between real and artificial is fast disappearing.

[1] How AI Deepfakes Are Disrupting Talent Acquisition – The Express Blog (accessed on 8^th Nov 2025)

[2] Digital Personal Data Protection Act (DPDPA), 2023 – iPleaders (accessed on 8^th Nov, 2025)

[3] Section 66D in The Information Technology Act, 2000 (accessed on 8^th Nov, 2025)

[4] Deepfake Regulation vs. Free Speech: Should India criminalize AI-generated deepfakes under fundamental rights concerns (accessed on 8^th Nov, 2025)

[5] Deepfakes on trial: How judges are navigating AI evidence authentication – Thomson Reuters Institute (accessed on 8^th Nov, 2025)

[6] Deepfakes in India: A Legal Analysis of Emerging Challenges and Regulatory Framework – LawArticle (accessed on 8^th Nov, 2025)

[7] www.ijfmr.com/papers/2024/4/24793.pdf (accessed on 8th Nov, 2025)

[8]Anil Kapoor vs Simply Life India & Ors on 20 September, 2023 (accessed on 8^th Nov, 2025)

[9]Amitabh Bachchan vs Rajat Nagi & Ors on 25 November, 2022 (accessed on 8^th nov, 2025)