Bombay High Court Bars Bihar Lawyer from Impersonating Sonu Nigam on X

Mumbai, July 14, 2025 – In a significant legal intervention aimed at curbing digital impersonation, the Bombay High Court has restrained a Bihar-based advocate, Sonu Nigam Singh, from representing himself as the famous Bollywood playback singer Sonu Nigam on social media platform X. The ruling comes in response to a petition filed by the singer, who alleged that Singh’s misleading content had created reputational damage and confusion among followers and the public.

Background and Petition

Singer Sonu Nigam, who has not been active on X since 2017, filed his petition under his real identity, drawing attention to an X account operating under the handle Sonu Nigam.” The handle, managed by criminal lawyer Sonu Nigam Singh, was used allegedly to post communal and politically sensitive material without marking it as impersonation

At the time of submission Singh had more than 90,000 followers who were joined by prominent names such as Prime Minister Narendra Modi and former Minister Smriti Irani. The petition argued that the followers and the media have mistakenly presumed the tweets were composed by the singer, leading to misplaced anger and individual harassment against him and his family.

Contentious Posts

The petition highlighted 14 specific instances of communal or politically sensitive remarks, including a notable tweet that urged BJP MP Tejasvi Surya to refrain from dubbing Kannada movies into Hindi, challenging him directly:

“Don’t dub Kannada movies in Hindi! Don’t release Kannada movies pan‑India! Do you have the guts to say this to Kannada film stars… or are you just another language warrior?”

Other posts reportedly included derogatory remarks about the IPL’s Royal Challengers Bengaluru following their championship win. Significantly, Singh allegedly accepted praise aimed at the singer—raising concerns about deliberate identity exploitation

Legal Arguments

Representing Sonu Nigam, senior advocate Hiren Kamod argued that Singh gained social credibility through the singer’s name, despite the absence of any commercial benefits. He stressed that the impersonation had triggered “absolute chaos” and considerable harassment toward the singer and family since August 2024

Despite Sonu Nigam not having trademarked his name, Kamod invoked established precedent affirming that names with significant public recognition can warrant legal protection akin to trademarks—especially when misuse leads to public confusion

High Court Order

On Friday, July 11, Justice R.I. Chagla granted ad interim relief, issuing an ex-parte injunction restraining Singh from misrepresenting himself as the singer. The bench ordered that Singh must immediately update his display name on X to his full name—“Sonu Nigam Singh”—to prevent further impersonation

The order remains interim, pending a full hearing of the suit, but ensures that Singh cannot perpetuate misleading identity-based communications in the meantime.

Significance of the Ruling

This highly publicized injunction underlines several crucial principles:

1. Personality Rights and Digital Identity
   The ruling reiterates that public figures have legal protection over name and personality online even in the absence of commercial motivation if impersonation results in confusion, reputational injury, or harassment.

       2. New Jurisprudence on Abuse of Non-Commercial Name

In recognizing non-commercial abuse of a name as injurious, the order gives a precedent to Indian digital jurisprudence and is on par with international efforts to enhance online identity protection.

3.Judicial Vigilance over Online Content
The decision showcases judicial readiness to regulate social media impersonation, ensuring accountability even in complex, politically charged scenarios.

Reactions and Next Steps

An official response from Sonu Nigam’s legal team termed the order a “critical step” towards protecting his digital reputation. They are set to advance the case. Sonu Nigam Singh has not made a public statement since the interim injunction.

The full hearing will be in a few weeks, where both sides will make in-depth submissions regarding alleged statements, intent, consequences, and available legal remedies.

Contextualizing Within Broader Trends

The ruling is against the backdrop of increasing worldwide awareness of impersonation on the internet. In India, a number of high-profile personalities—celebrities, journalists, and professionals—have been victims of impersonation fraud on social media like X, Instagram, and Facebook. Courts have grown to issue injunctions and orders of compensation, acknowledging digital identity as part of individual rights.

Such cross-border verdicts—like in America and Britain—have ordered social websites to act against harmful impersonation. The Bombay High Court ruling is the latest addition to the growing legal jurisprudence addressing reputational challenges of the new age.

Conclusion

Through this interim order, the Bombay High Court has taken strong steps to protect a public figure’s identity in the online world. Through forcing open disclosure and stopping further misuse, Justice Chagla’s ruling establishes solid ground for shielding people from the dangers of online impersonation. Such judgments will surely influence future procedures for both platforms and individuals handling their online presence.

References

• Bombay High Court restraints reported by Bar & Bench
• Coverage in Times of India
• Additional details from Hindustan Times
• Firstpost legal perspective
• Moneycontrol’s summary