DEEPFAKES AND SYNTHETIC MEDIA IN INDIA: ARE EXISTING LAWS SUFFICIENT?

1. Introduction

AI can now make fake photos, videos and voice clips which look and sound completely real. When AI is used to show a real person doing or saying something which he never did, it is called deepfake.

Some deepfakes are made for fun, movies, education or satire. But when misused, it creates serious problems like fraud, defamation, fake news, election manipulation, fake intimate images of women, and privacy violation.

Because of this, the Government of India has strengthened laws under IT Act, 2000 and IT Rules, 2021. In February 2026, Government made new amendments specially for Synthetically Generated Information (SGI) which includes deepfakes.

2. What is Deepfake?

Deepfake means any audio, video or image which is created or changed by AI to make it look real, so that a person appears to say or do something which he never actually did.

Examples:

- Fake video of a leader giving false statement

- Cloning voice of father to demand money

- Changing face in a video

- Making fake nude photo of a woman

- Fake election speech of candidate

- Fake celebrity advertisement

- Fake news footage

In new 2026 Rules, the Government uses the word SGI for all such synthetic content.

3. Constitutional Angle

Article 14 - Equality: Deepfakes mostly target women, children and vulnerable people. The state must give equal protection.

Article 19(1)(a) - Freedom of Speech: Making videos may be part of free speech. But Article 19(2) allows restrictions for sovereignty, security, public order, decency, defamation and incitement to offence. So free speech cannot be excuse for harmful deepfakes.

Article 21 - Privacy and Dignity: Fake videos affect privacy, reputation, dignity. In _K.S. Puttaswamy case (2017)_ Supreme Court said privacy is a fundamental right. Delhi High Court has also said misuse of image and voice through AI violates privacy.

4. IT Act, 2000 -

Section 43 & 66: Deals with damage to computer systems and cheating done through computers. If someone unauthorisedly uses a computer to make fake content for fraud, it can apply.

Section 66C - Identity Theft: If someone dishonestly uses password, digital signature or unique identity of another person. Useful when deepfake is made with identity theft.

Section 66D - Cheating by Personation: Very important. If someone cheats by pretending to be another person using computer or mobile. Example - cloning voice of bank manager and asking for money transfer.

Section 66E - Privacy Violation: If private body parts images are captured or published without consent. Relevant for morphed intimate images.

Section 67, 67A, 67B: For obscene and sexually explicit content. If deepfake is used to make fake porn videos, these sections apply. Section 67B is for child pornography.

Section 69A - Blocking Power: The government can order blocking of harmful deepfake content.

Section 79 - Intermediary Liability: Social media platforms get protection only if they follow due diligence. They cannot ignore complaints. Case _Shreya Singhal (2015)_ explains this.

5. IT Rules, 2021 and 2026 Amendment

IT Rules, 2021 puts duty on intermediaries like Facebook, Instagram, X, YouTube to remove illegal content.

In 2023-24 Government issued advisories that false information and impersonation is not allowed.

The most important change came on 10 February 2026, enforced from 20 February 2026. Government added specific rules for SGI/deepfakes:

- Platforms must identify synthetic content

- Must label AI-generated content clearly

- Must keep traceability and metadata

- Must use technical measures to detect synthetic content

- Must prevent unlawful content like impersonation, obscene content, NCII, child abuse, misleading content

- Must protect children specially

- Must remove unlawful content within 3 hours after court order or Government intimation - because deepfake becomes viral in minutes

This 3-hour rule is very important for victims.

6. Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS)

BNS also applies along with IT Act:

- Cheating and Personation: If deepfake used to cheat someone.

- Section 336 - Forgery: Making false electronic records to cheat, defame or cause injury. Now false electronic records are expressly included, so fake deepfake video used as evidence can come under forgery.

- Section 337: Forgery of court record or government document. If someone makes a fake court order video or ID.

- Defamation: If fake video damages reputation, defamation provisions apply.

7. DPDP Act, 2023

Digital Personal Data Protection Act deals with personal data like photo, video, voice. If someone uses your personal data to make a deepfake without consent, the DPDP Act may apply. But it is not a complete deepfake law, it only deals with data protection.

8. Special Types of Harm

a) Non-Consensual Intimate Imagery (NCII): Most serious misuse. The face of a woman was put on porn video. Laws applicable - 66E, 67, 67A, BNS, privacy rights, civil injunction. The government also made SOP for quick removal of NCII.

b) Financial Fraud: Voice cloning used for fraud. Example - "I am in an accident, send 1 lakh." This attracts 66D, 66C and cheating under BNS.

c) Elections: Fake videos of candidates making communal speeches or announcing withdrawal can disturb elections. The Election Commission in 2026 said all campaign related AI content must be clearly labelled.

9. Freedom of Speech Issue

All synthetic media cannot be banned. Many are legal - film VFX, education, parody, satire, art, research. Law should see intent, harm, deception and consent, not ban everything. Government framework also allows lawful creative use with proper labelling.

10. Why Earlier Laws Were Considered Insufficient

Before the 2026 amendment, there was no single Deepfake Act. Different harm had to be covered by different laws:

- Identity theft - 66C

- Impersonation - 66D

- Privacy - 66E + Article 21

- Obscene content - 67/67A

- Child content - 67B

- Forgery - BNS 336

- Blocking - 69A

- Platform duty - IT Rules

This created fragmentation and confusion.

11. Are Existing Laws Now Sufficient After the 2026 Amendment?

The position is much better now, but still not fully sufficient.

What is improved:

- Now SGI/deepfake specifically defined

- Labelling and traceability mandatory

- 3-hour removal rule

- Clear duties for impersonation and NCII

What challenges remain:

1. No single comprehensive Deepfake Act with full procedure.

2. It is difficult to find who made a deepfake if VPN and fake accounts are used.

3. The creator may be outside India, enforcement is difficult.

4. Technology changes faster than law.

5. Detection is difficult as deepfakes become more real.

6. Over-regulation may affect free speech, satire.

7. Even after removal, copy may exist on other platforms.

8. Small AI tools and Telegram channels are hard to regulate.

12. Suggestions

1. Make unified law covering creation, publication, distribution, platform duty, victim remedy and punishment.

2. Mandatory watermark / metadata in all AI content.

3. Clear labelling - user should know at first look if content is AI or real.

4. Fast and simple complaint system for victims.

5. Stronger protection for women and children in NCII cases.

6. International cooperation for cross-border cases.

7. Digital literacy - teach people to verify videos.

8. AI forensic labs for police.

9. Make big platforms accountable - grievance officer, evidence preservation, rapid action team.

13. Practical Legal Remedy for a Victim - Step by Step

If a person becomes a victim of deepfake, he should not panic and should follow these practical steps. Time is very important because deepfake spread fast.

Step 1 - Preserve Evidence:

Immediately save original URL, link, screen recording and screenshots. Take a full page screenshot showing account name and date. Download a copy of the video if possible. Do not edit it.

Step 2 - Note Details:

Write date, time when you first saw content, name of account/page, number of views/shares, any comments. This will help police to prove the offence.

Step 3 - Report to Platform:

Every social media platform has a Grievance Officer under IT Rules, 2021. File a complaint with the URL and ask for removal. For NCII and intimate deepfakes, platforms have to act quickly. Keep acknowledgment number.

Step 4 - Go to Police / Cyber Crime:

File complaint at local police or on http://cybercrime.gov.in or call 1930 helpline. Give all evidence. In case of intimate images, police can also register FIR under Section 66E, 67, 67A IT Act and relevant sections of BNS.

Step 5 - Mention Correct Laws:

In complaint, mention applicable provisions as per facts:

- Identity theft / impersonation - 66C, 66D IT Act

- Privacy - 66E IT Act

- Obscene content - 67, 67A IT Act

- Child related - 67B IT Act

- Cheating, forgery, defamation - BNS 2023

- Data protection violation - DPDP Act 2023

Step 6 - Urgent Court Relief:

If content is causing serious damage to reputation or privacy, victims can approach the High Court or District Court for an urgent injunction order. In personality rights cases like Anil Kapoor and Jaya Bachchan, Delhi High Court granted John Doe injunctions and ordered platforms to remove content and disclose identity of creator.

Step 7 - Request Blocking:

Under Section 69A IT Act, the Government can order blocking. Victim can request through the police to MeitY for blocking the URL. Under the new 2026 amendment, platforms must remove unlawful synthetic content within 3 hours after court or Government order.

Step 8 - Preserve Forensic Evidence:

Keep original file with metadata if available. Police forensic lab can analyse whether content is AI generated, which tool used, and trace source. Do not delete original chat or email if a deepfake comes through WhatsApp or email.

This step-by-step remedy helps victims to get quick removal and also helps in prosecution.

14. Important Case Laws for Assignment 

Most relevant case laws –

1. K.S. Puttaswamy Vs Union of India (2017) - SC: Right to privacy held as fundamental right under Article 21. Foundation for all deepfake privacy cases.

2. R. Rajagopal Vs State of Tamil Nadu (1994) - Auto Shankar Case: The Supreme Court said no one can publish private life or personal identity without consent. Privacy includes the right to protect image.

3. Shreya Singhal Vs Union of India (2015): Supreme Court struck down Section 66A but upheld intermediary liability. Said platforms must remove illegal content after actual knowledge. Important for platform duty in deepfake cases.

4. Subramanian Swamy Vs Union of India (2016): The Supreme Court upheld criminal defamation. Said reputation is part of Article 21. Fake deepfake causing defamation can attract defamation law and is reasonable restriction under Article 19(2).

5. Anil Kapoor Vs Simply Life India & Ors. (Delhi HC, 2023): Landmark case on AI and personality rights. Court protected name, image, voice, likeness from AI misuse, morphed videos, deepfakes. The court said satire is allowed but commercial misuse, tarnishment, false endorsement is not allowed. Injunction granted.

6. Jaya Bachchan Vs Bollywood Bubble Television & Ors. (Delhi HC, 2025): Again Delhi HC protected personality rights against AI and morphed content. Court restrained use of name, voice, signature, persona without consent.

7. Amitabh Bachchan case (Delhi HC, 2022): The court protected against a fake lottery using his photo and voice cloning. Showing deepfake also leads to financial fraud and cheating.

These cases show the judiciary is developing a new right - Personality Rights + Protection against AI misuse.

15. Final Conclusion

Deepfakes are a new form of digital manipulation which can cause serious harm to privacy, dignity, reputation, financial security, election integrity and public trust.

India's legal response has changed. Earlier we were dependent only on general provisions of IT Act, BNS, and privacy judgments. Now after 10 February 2026 amendments to IT Rules, 2021, we have a specific framework for Synthetically Generated Information - rules for labelling, traceability, detection, platform due diligence, and 3-hour removal for harmful content.

So answer the research question "Are Existing Laws Sufficient?" is:

After the 2026 amendments, Indian laws are substantially capable of dealing with many types of deepfake misuse. Most harms like impersonation, NCII, financial fraud, defamation can be covered. But the framework is still not completely sufficient because laws are scattered in IT Act, BNS, DPDP Act, IT Rules, no single comprehensive Deepfake Act exists, tracing creators is difficult, cross-border enforcement is a problem, and technology is changing very fast.

Therefore, we still need a coordinated, technology-neutral and rights-protective framework with stronger victim remedy, mandatory provenance/watermark, clearer platform accountability and international cooperation.

The Government, courts, and social media platforms must work together to prevent deepfake misuse. Strong laws, quick action, and public awareness are essential to protect privacy, dignity, and digital safety.

“Stop Deepfakes, Protect Digital Rights!”

Author. Ragini Mani Tripathi 

Manu Law College