Full Breakdown
Delhi High Court Hears Woman’s Plea to Remove Deepfake Image Linking Her to Prime Minister Narendra Modi
By Drooid · · How we work
Core Event: Urgent hearing on alleged deep-fake circulation
On September 25, 2026, a division bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia listed an urgent petition that seeks the removal, blocking and takedown of a purportedly morphed photograph. The petition alleges that the image shows the petitioner’s face superimposed onto a vulgar composition alongside Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The respondents are four leaders of the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP)—Saurav Das, Abhijit Dipke, Ashutosh Ranka and Ratna Singh.
Background & Context: CJP protest and alleged Artificial Intelligence (AI) manipulation
The petitioner, identified in the filing as Riddhima Sharma, says the deep-fake was created during a CJP protest at Jantar Mantar, New Delhi. According to the petition, the leaders “unauthorisedly harvested” her personal photograph and employed artificial-intelligence face-swapping tools to place her likeness on a highly vulgar image that also featured Prime Minister Modi. The altered image was displayed on protest banners and subsequently circulated on social-media platforms and pornographic websites.
Legal Framework & Data
- FIR registration: The Cyber Police Station, New Delhi, recorded a First-Information Report on September 24, 2026 under the Information Technology Act and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
- Petition basis: The writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).
- Reliefs sought: Directions to social-media platforms and Meta Platforms to trace, block and remove the alleged deep-fake; police protection for the petitioner; an expeditious investigation to secure electronic evidence; periodic status reports to the High Court.
Official Statements & Responses
- The court also noted that the petitioner has sought protection for her life, liberty and bodily integrity.
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
All sources present the same factual outline of the petition and the court’s procedural action. No court decision on the merits has been rendered, and the allegations remain unverified. The petition’s claim that threatening and abusive messages were sent to the petitioner after the image’s circulation is reported without independent corroboration.
What’s Next
The court’s order creates a procedural pathway for the petitioner to obtain directions for removal of the deep-fake and for police to investigate the FIR. No further hearing date for this specific petition has been announced in the available reports.