19 February,2026 07:08 PM IST | Mumbai | mid-day online correspondent
Jubin Nautiyal
Singer Jubin Nautiyal recently approached the Delhi High Court on Thursday, where he filed a suit for the protection of his personality rights. However, the Delhi HC, which has seen an influx of celebrities approaching it, why Jubin, who is based in Uttarakhand, did not approach a local high court and instead came to Delhi.
The judge Justice Tushar Rao Gedela questioned Jubin's lawyer about why the singer did not approach a court in Uttarakhand, and how the Delhi High Court would have jurisdiction to consider Nautiyal's suit. The judge also remarked that the courts in Uttarakhad were not abolished.
The counsel argued that the Delhi HC was approached because the controlling authorities, such as the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) and the Department of Technology (DoT), were located in the national capital. Nevertheless, the court did not buy the reason.
"What is the reason for coming here? Court in Uttarakhand can't call them [defendants] and pass directions? Are you saying Google is not available in Uttarakhand? You have to tell us this, no? Why Uttarakhand doesn't have jurisdiction when you yourself are located there? Is it the law that because the ministry is here, whatever will be against them, all jurisdiction, whether from Madras, Calcutta or Bombay will come here?" the Court asked.
Further, the counsel also stated that many other celebrities, like Vivek Oberoi, also approached the Delhi High Court for the protection of personality rights. To which the Court noted that those are interim orders and they may not create a precedent. "They are all Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 orders. Will that create a precedent?" Justice Gedela asked.
In the end, the judge said that he will pass appropriate orders in the case, saying, "We will pass orders."
Jubin approached the Delhi HC claiming that several entities have been exploiting his name, voice, image, likeness, and other elements of his persona without authorisation, license or permission. The singer claimed that this constitutes an infringement of his personality and publicity rights. It was also a violation of registered trademarks, copyrights, and other intellectual property rights.
However, during the hearing of the case, Justice Gedela noted that Nautiyal is from Uttarakhand and the defendants against whom he was seeking reliefs can be made parties in the Uttarakhand courts as well. Notably, an order has yet to be issued in the case.
