Introduction:

In the case Namrata Ankush Kawale & Anr vs. Tukaram Nivrutti Karve & Ors., the Bombay High Court has sought responses from various state governments, political parties, and the US-based stock image platform Shutterstock after a woman alleged unauthorized use of her photographs in advertising campaigns. A division bench of Justice G. S. Kulkarni and Justice Advait M. Sethna observed that the case appears to involve the commercial exploitation of the petitioner’s image without her knowledge or consent. The petitioner, Namrata Ankush Kawale, argued that her right to privacy had been violated, as her photographs were used in advertisements for various government schemes and political promotions without her permission. The Court, acknowledging the seriousness of the allegations, issued notices to Shutterstock through the Ministry of External Affairs and the US Consulate and directed the respondents, including the state governments of Maharashtra, Telangana, Odisha, and Karnataka, as well as political entities like the Congress Party of Telangana and private agencies, to respond to the petition.

Arguments of Both Sides:

The petitioner, Namrata Ankush Kawale, contended that her photographs had been misused without her consent by multiple political and governmental entities. She alleged that Tukaram Nivrutti Karve, a man from her village, took her pictures a few years ago and uploaded them on Shutterstock, from where they were accessed and used for various campaigns without her knowledge. She asserted that her images had been featured on hoardings, social media platforms, and advertisements promoting different government schemes, violating her right to privacy as guaranteed under the Constitution of India. She sought a permanent injunction restraining all respondents from using, displaying, distributing, or selling her images in any form. The respondents, including Shutterstock, state governments, political parties, and private agencies, are expected to justify their actions. Shutterstock, as a stock image provider, may argue that it functions as a platform where individuals upload and sell photographs, and that it is not directly responsible for verifying the legality of the images uploaded. The government bodies and political parties may contend that they acquired the images through legal channels and had no knowledge that they were used without consent. The matter raises significant legal questions about digital privacy, consent in photography, and the responsibilities of online platforms in preventing unauthorized distribution of personal images.

Court’s Judgment:

The Bombay High Court, taking cognizance of the gravity of the allegations, emphasized the evolving nature of privacy concerns in the digital era. The bench observed that the case prima facie indicates the commercial exploitation of the petitioner’s image without her consent, which, if proven, constitutes a severe violation of her fundamental rights. The Court noted that such unauthorized use of personal photographs, particularly by responsible bodies like government entities and political organizations, raises alarming concerns about privacy breaches. The judges directed that notices be issued to all respondents, particularly Shutterstock, through the Ministry of External Affairs and the US Consulate in Mumbai/New Delhi, ensuring that the international company provides a response. The Court also instructed state governments, political parties, and private agencies implicated in the petition to file their replies, justifying their use of the petitioner’s photographs. Acknowledging the sensitive nature of the matter, the Court scheduled the next hearing for March 24, 2025. This case sets a crucial precedent for digital rights, privacy protection, and the accountability of online platforms in handling user-uploaded content.