Vikas Divyakirti deepfake video — Sep 2026
The Delhi High Court ordered the removal of deepfake videos and fake social media profiles that used the identity of educator Vikas Divyakirti to falsely.
- Incident date
- Sep 29, 2026
- Source report date
- Sep 29, 2026
- Target
- Vikas Divyakirti
In September 2026, the Delhi High Court issued an order mandating the removal of unauthorized deepfake videos and fake social media profiles that misappropriated the identity of educator and Drishti IAS founder Vikas Divyakirti. The legal action followed a plea from Divyakirti seeking protection against the misuse of his name, image, and likeness across various digital platforms.
What happened
The incident involved the creation of fake social media profiles and channels on platforms including YouTube and Instagram that utilized Divyakirti’s name and photograph without his consent. Beyond simple impersonation, the content included deepfake videos that falsely depicted the educator endorsing betting and trading platforms. Additionally, the court reviewed evidence regarding the unauthorized use of clips from Divyakirti’s original lectures, which had been edited and re-captioned to convey meanings different from the original context.
During the proceedings, Justice AJ Bhambhani expressed significant concern regarding the accessibility of digital tools capable of generating such manipulated content without effective mechanisms to identify the perpetrators. The court drew a comparison between the lack of oversight for these powerful digital tools and the strict licensing requirements associated with physical items like firearms.
While the court ordered the immediate takedown of the identified fake profiles and deepfake material, it reserved judgment on the broader legal implications of editing and re-captioning lecture clips. This ongoing aspect of the case will address whether such alterations constitute an infringement of copyright or personality rights. Counsel for Divyakirti highlighted that specific platform features, which allow users to overlay their own performance onto existing video content, have facilitated the reuse of his lectures in misleading contexts. The court continues to deliberate on the responsibilities of digital platforms in preventing the misuse of these features.