Timeline of AI law in India

Association's separate revision withdrawn

Justice Prateek Jalan dismisses C.R.P. 287/2025 as withdrawn after arguments; the order does not mention AI.

Order before Justice Deshmukh

Defendants 4 and 6 undertake to provide information on a proper request. The matter is adjourned to 14 January 2026 and ad-interim relief continues.

Supreme Court declines to regulate by order

A bench led by CJI Surya Kant says judges are extremely cautious and AI will not be allowed to overpower judicial decision-making, and allows a plea seeking regulation to be withdrawn.

Fresh hearing before new bench

Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu and Shri Keshav Dubey hear the appeal afresh.

Delhi HC remarks on takedown burden

In Rajat Sharma's personality-rights suit the court is reported to say people should not have to come to court over deepfakes.

Broadband India Forum argues right to information

BIF argues that Article 19 protects the right to receive information and opposes any injunction.

Etsy compliance affidavits

Etsy files compliance affidavits in both suits (Defendant 5 in the Aishwarya suit and Defendant 9 in the Abhishek suit).

Ex parte against Defendant 16

Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora closes Defendant 16's right to file a written statement and proceeds ex parte against it.

Janitor AI compliance affidavit

Defendant 7 in the Aishwarya suit files a compliance affidavit, later relied on to delete it from the suit.

Cited in Akshay Kumar's order

Counsel for Akshay Hari Om Bhatia cites the Arijit Singh order as 2024 SCC OnLine Bom 2445, paras 16-18, in a Bombay High Court personality-rights suit.

Cited in Akshay Kumar's suit

Counsel for Akshay Hari Om Bhatia cites the order as 2025 SCC OnLine Bom 3485 (paras 15 to 18).

Compliance recorded

Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora records compliance by X, Meta, DoT and MeitY, and asks YouTube to use technology to remove identical or similar content.

Compliance reported

Counsel for Defendant 4 says the 29 September order has been complied with. The matter is stood over to 17 November 2025 and ad-interim relief continues.

Cited in Suniel Shetty's suit

Counsel for Suniel Shetty cites Asha Bhosle v. Mayk Inc in the Bombay High Court; the same court grants him an ex parte order covering AI-generated content, deepfakes and voice-cloned audio.

Order reported

Bar & Bench reports that the court held AI voice-conversion tools offered without consent violate celebrity personality rights.

Order relied on in Asha Bhosle's case

The Bombay High Court cites the Aishwarya Rai Bachchan order when protecting Asha Bhosle against AI voice cloning.

Cited in Asha Bhosle's order

The Bombay High Court (Justice Arif S. Doctor) relies on the Arijit Singh order when protecting Asha Bhosle against AI voice cloning.

Ad-interim injunction

The Bombay High Court restrains the AI and seller defendants from using her name, voice and likeness through AI, and directs Amazon, Flipkart and Google to remove content and disclose details.

ThePrint report

ThePrint reports that the petition's fake quotations and cases were attributed to ChatGPT by the respondents' lawyers, and that the judge called such use impermissible.

Matter wrongly listed

Justice Arif S. Doctor records that the matter was wrongly placed on the board and should be listed on 29 September 2025.

Delhi High Court records non-existent precedents; petition withdrawn

Justice Girish Kathpalia notes counsel's statements that some cited precedents and quoted portions do not exist, and dismisses CM(M) 1909/2025 as withdrawn.

Writ petition disposed of

After the President reassigns the case to another bench, Justice M. Nagaprasanna disposes of the petition as infructuous, with liberty to the trust to pursue remedies if an adverse order follows.

First of three trial court orders

A Karkardooma trial court passes the first of the orders of 18, 20 and 22 September 2025 that the association challenges.

NCLAT dismisses the appeal

In Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1808 of 2024 the NCLAT upholds the admission and reproduces the NCLT's paragraph 12 with the six citations.

Abhishek Bachchan: companion order

In CS(COMM) 960/2025 the same judge passes a mirror order against 15 defendants, directing 72-hour takedowns and blocking of URLs.

Aishwarya Rai Bachchan: ex parte interim injunction

Justice Tejas Karia restrains 10 defendants from using her name, image and likeness through AI, deepfakes and face morphing, and directs Google, an e-commerce platform, MeitY and DoT to act.

Procedural directions

Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora gives the plaintiff further time to comply with earlier directions and lists the suit in December 2025.

Karnataka High Court interim order

In W.P. 25280/2025 the High Court records that the order prima facie appears AI-driven, stays Tribunal proceedings and restrains the Judicial Member who authored the recalled order from hearing the matter.

Trial court cites four non-existent judgments

A trial court in Andhra Pradesh dismisses objections to an Advocate Commissioner's report, relying on four decisions the defendants say do not exist.

Batch listed

Last verified listing date; the outcome could not be located.

Kerala issues first judicial AI policy

The Kerala High Court bars the use of AI for findings and judgments in the district judiciary and restricts cloud chatbots.

Ex parte against Defendants 15 and 24

The suit proceeds only against Defendants 15, 16 and 24, and Defendants 15 and 24 are proceeded against ex parte.

Six interventions allowed

FIP, DNPA, IMI, Flux Labs AI, IGAP and Broadband India Forum are allowed to make submissions confined to the issues framed in November 2024.

Critique published

SpicyIP publishes an analysis of the Sadhguru and Ankur Warikoo orders questioning their doctrinal basis and the 36-hour takedown.

Ex parte "dynamic+" injunction

Justice Saurabh Banerjee restrains the primary defendants, orders domain suspension, takedown and blocking, and permits 36-hour notice-and-removal of new deepfake content.

Supreme Court sends Goswami PIL to Delhi

A Supreme Court bench declines W.P.(C) 300/2025 and relegates the petitioner to the Delhi High Court.

Goswami deepfake PIL relegated to Delhi

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and N. Kotiswar Singh declines W.P.(C) 300/2025 because the Delhi High Court is seized of connected matters, and gives liberty to seek impleadment there.

Takedown requests to YouTube

The plaintiffs' representatives send takedown requests on 10 May and again on 13 May 2025.

TV Today Network petition disposed of

The court disposes of W.P.(C) 6037/2025 with liberty to send suggestions to the committee and lists the batch for 23 July 2025.

Status report: two meetings held

MeitY reports that the committee has met twice and needs further deliberation; three months are allowed.

Grievance Appellate Committee order

A Grievance Appellate Committee order leads YouTube to remove some content, according to the plaintiffs.

Commentary and press reports

SpicyIP publishes an analysis of the order and the recall, citing a Livemint report describing the errors as AI hallucinations.

Hearings begin

The court begins hearing the interim application, starting with the amici. Hearings continue over 21 dates.

Fresh hearing fixed after recall

The Tribunal recalls its own order on suo motu perusal under Section 254(2), noting "certain inadvertent errors", and fixes a fresh hearing on this date.

Music labels seek to intervene

Indian Music Industry, reportedly backed by T-Series, Saregama and Sony Music, applies to intervene (I.A. 4027/2025).

Jurisdiction objection deferred; amici submissions on record

OpenAI objects to territorial jurisdiction, and the court says it will decide the point with the injunction application. Notice is issued on DNPA's intervention, and intervenors are told the scope of the suit will not be enlarged.