India has already seen several significant court rulings concerning deepfakes, including those involving prominent Bollywood actors and actresses. The order issued on 22 October 2025 by the Judicial Magistrate First Class of Mohali, in the State of Punjab in north-western India, marks a new stage: this time a senior political leader is targeted, and the judge orders a global removal of the manipulated content.
On 21 October 2025, the Punjab Cyber-Surveillance Unit identified several videos and images posted on Facebook from an account called “Jagman Samra.”
These files depicted the Chief Minister of Punjab, Sh. Bhagwant Mann, in indecent and altered scenes, strongly suggesting that the content may have been AI-generated.
The alleged account holder was identified as residing in Canada. Considering the serious risk to the political leader’s reputation and potential disturbance of public order, the Punjab police initiated a criminal procedure based on:
Under Indian criminal procedure, investigations begin with the filing of an official police report of the alleged offence, which formally triggers the inquiry.
After notifying Meta, the authorities immediately referred the matter to the duty magistrate seeking an urgent takedown order.
The court recalls that freedom of expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution is not absolute. It must be read alongside Article 19(2), which allows restrictions in the interests of decency, morality, State security and public order.
The deepfake content at issue does not fall within the scope of legitimate political debate. It is wholly fabricated, unsupported by any public record and unrelated to the Chief Minister’s official duties.
Drawing on landmark constitutional decisions, particularly Puttaswamy and R. Rajagopal, the magistrate reiterates that public figures retain meaningful protection of their privacy and reputation where content:
The court then applies the conditional liability regime set out in Section 79 of the Information Technology Act: online intermediaries, such as Meta, benefit from immunity only if they promptly remove unlawful content once notified.
The Intermediary Guidelines & Digital Media Ethics Code Rules 2021, and in particular Rule 3(d), impose a maximum timeframe of 36 hours for disabling access to manifestly illegal material.
The magistrate adopts a pragmatic stance common in recent Indian jurisprudence: at the emergency stage, it is not necessary to technically establish that the images are AI-generated.
It is sufficient that the content:
The judge therefore orders:
This approach follows the reasoning of X v. Union of India, which requires global, comprehensive and effective removal rather than partial or symbolic compliance.
This 22 October 2025 order confirms the central role played by Indian courts in addressing deepfakes, whether targeting Bollywood celebrities or, as here, high-ranking political leaders.
The ruling illustrates a strict articulation between fundamental rights, public order, privacy protection and the digital responsibility of large platforms.
For any in-depth analysis under Indian law, advice from a local practitioner specialised in technology and digital regulation is strongly recommended.
