Published On: July 13, 2026
Authored By: Mutahira Afifa
St Joseph's College of Law
Abstract
With the rapid growth of artificial intelligence technology, deepfakes have become highly advanced tools that are both useful and harmful. The term “deepfake” refers to audio, video, or images created through digital manipulation that appear authentic but are not. Even though there are various beneficial applications of this technology, it is now commonly used to harass people, disseminate misinformation, and violate privacy. In India, the rise in cases involving deepfakes is concerning, particularly as the technology is being used to target and stalk women. This article provides insight into the legal status of deepfakes in India, the loopholes in existing laws, and the urgent need for legislation around digital consent and accountability. Current legal statutes, including the Information Technology Act, 2000, the Indian Penal Code, and various data privacy laws, offer insufficient solutions and fail to tackle the issues associated with deepfake technology comprehensively. This article explores the legal ramifications of deepfake technology in India and argues for the immediate recognition of digital consent as an essential element of law. It further contends that consent should apply not only to tangible acts but also to virtual manifestations of one’s identity, voice, and likeness.
Introduction
The pace at which technology is developing today is incredibly rapid, and one technology in particular that has come into widespread usage in recent times is artificial intelligence (AI). One AI-driven technology, known as deepfake, enables individuals to fabricate fake video, audio, or visual content that appears authentic, for example, placing a person’s face onto someone else’s body in a video.
Although deepfakes can be employed for legitimate purposes such as filmmaking or entertainment, they are becoming increasingly prevalent in unethical ways. Many individuals, particularly women, are becoming victims of deepfake videos in which their faces are used without consent for offensive or deceptive material.
In India, the law in this respect continues to evolve. There are no specific laws that address deepfakes, making their regulation challenging. Political leaders, celebrities, actors, and even ordinary citizens have fallen prey to fake content spread through social media. Deepfakes are employed in information campaigns, financial fraud, revenge pornography, defamation, and identity fraud. The absence of explicit laws concerning digital identity rights creates substantial gaps in accountability and victims’ protection.
Understanding Deepfakes
Deepfakes are created through AI techniques that manipulate images, videos, and audio recordings to produce realistic but fabricated content. These technologies use machine learning and facial mapping to replace a person’s face or voice with another’s. Originally designed for academic research and creative purposes, deepfakes have since been adopted across multiple sectors, film, marketing, education, and gaming. However, the same technology is increasingly misused for harmful ends. Criminals use deepfakes to impersonate individuals, commit financial fraud, manufacture disinformation, and distribute obscene material without consent.
The most serious threat posed by deepfakes is the erosion of public trust. When fabricated content becomes indistinguishable from reality, people may grow sceptical of genuine information, causing a loss of faith in journalism, judicial systems, and government institutions. This phenomenon is widely referred to as the “liar’s dividend”, enabling perpetrators to dismiss legitimate information as fabricated.
Legal Analysis
The development of deepfake technology has given rise to several significant legal concerns.
1. Right to Privacy
The right to privacy has been recognised as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. When a person’s image or voice is used without their permission, it amounts to an infringement of their dignity and autonomy. Victims of deepfake harassment suffer severe distress; their reputations are damaged by fake or pornographic images and videos created without their consent. Existing statutes do not adequately address harms caused specifically by deepfake technology, which remains a significant gap in the law.
2. Harassment and Gender-Based Harm
Deepfakes are increasingly used to intimidate others, with women being disproportionately targeted. The creation of non-consensual intimate imagery using deepfake technology causes serious reputational and psychological harm. Current legal frameworks lack the specific provisions necessary to adequately prosecute such conduct.
3. Inadequacy of Existing Law
Current legal frameworks, including the IT Act, 2000 and the Indian Penal Code, provide some protection but are insufficient to address deepfake technology comprehensively. A fundamental problem is the absence of any statutory definition of “deepfake.” Without specific rules, prosecution of offenders remains difficult. There is therefore an urgent need for legal reform addressing consent, liability, and preventive measures in the context of deepfake technology.
Statutory Framework
1. Existing Statutory Provisions
The Government of India has enacted laws that offer partial protection against deepfake-related harms:
Information Technology Act, 2000, Sections 67 and 67A: provide punishment for the publication of obscene or sexually explicit material online.
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 499 and 500: provide punishment for defamation.
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 509: provides punishment for words, gestures, or acts intended to insult the modesty of a woman.
These provisions may apply to deepfake-related offences depending on the nature of the act, but none were designed with deepfake technology in mind.
2. Case Laws
K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017): In this landmark ruling, the Supreme Court held that privacy is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. The judgment establishes that deepfakes created and shared without an individual’s consent constitute a violation of this fundamental right.
Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015): This case reaffirmed the importance of freedom of expression while also recognising the need for constraints on the misuse of electronic platforms. Together, these decisions provide a constitutional framework for regulating harmful digital content and protecting citizens from technological abuse.
3. Policy Developments
The Indian government has taken steps to address digital harms through amendments to the Information Technology Rules and broader discussions on AI governance. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 underscores the importance of obtaining consent before processing personal data online and provides a foundation for further reform in this area. At the state level, the Government of Karnataka has reportedly been developing a digital safety policy focused on AI technologies, encompassing AI content labelling, expedited grievance resolution, and social media accountability. However, no law specifically targeting deepfake technology has yet been enacted. The risk of tension between expansive takedown powers, traceability obligations, and the rights to freedom of speech and privacy remains a challenge that any future framework must carefully navigate.
4. Proposed Regulatory Framework
A dedicated deepfake regulation framework for India could include the following elements:
> Mandatory consent for AI-generated replication of a person’s likeness.
> Penalties for the deliberate creation and distribution of harmful deepfakes.
> Obligations on platforms to detect and label manipulated content.
> Accessible redressal mechanisms for affected parties.
> Compensation for reputational and emotional harm suffered by victims.
> AI transparency and digital watermarking standards.
Such a framework would promote accountability without stifling innovation or unduly restricting freedom of expression.
Conclusion
Deepfake technology, while not without legitimate applications, poses serious risks to individual privacy, emotional wellbeing, and the integrity of public information. In India, the existing legal framework is inadequate to govern this technology effectively. What is needed is specifically drafted legislation that mandates prior consent for the use of a person’s image or likeness, establishes clear penalties for harmful deepfake creation and distribution, and provides meaningful remedies for victims.
Addressing deepfake harm also requires public awareness and the development of safer detection technologies. Law and technology must evolve together. In a digital age where artificial intelligence can mimic reality, the law will be judged not by its inability to change, but by whether it succeeds in upholding the constitutional values of human dignity, privacy, and freedom.
References
Cases
K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) 10 SCC 1.
Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015) 5 SCC 1.
Legislation
Information Technology Act, 2000.
Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023.
Constitution of India, art 21.
