Deepfakes And Criminal Law: Is Existing Law Adequate?
- IJLLR Journal
- Mar 6
- 1 min read
Shashwat Gupta, B.A. LL.B., (Hons), Guru Govind Singh Indraprastha University
Disha Gupta, B.A. LL.B., (Hons), Guru Govind Singh Indraprastha University
Harsh Suman, B.B.A LL.B., (Hons), Guru Govind Singh Indraprastha University
ABSTRACT
Deepfakes creep into our daily digital lives like master illusionists, swapping real faces onto fabricated scandals, scams, and speeches that can topple reputations or swing elections in a nation as online-savvy as India. This research paper takes a hard look at whether the country's criminal law arsenal—anchored by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023's clauses on forgery, personation, and public mischief; the Information Technology Act 2000's punches against identity theft under Section 66C-D, privacy invasions via 66E, and obscene content in 67; plus the 2026 IT Rules' rush for three- hour takedowns and AI labels—truly measures up to this AI-born menace, or if it's a creaky old bike sputtering against a supersonic threat. We break down the tech behind GAN-driven fakes, wrestle with digital evidence headaches under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam where certificates falter and forensics lag, spotlight enforcement snags from undertrained police to borderless servers, untangle constitutional knots tying Article 19(1)(a) free speech to Article 21 dignity protections, and peek at sharper global tools like the EU AI Act's fines or Korea's jail terms for inspiration. Real-world cases—from political hoaxes to women's targeted nudes—paint a stark picture: existing laws snag the obvious but buckle on intent proof, scale, and speed, demanding bold fixes like a standalone Deepfake Offences Act with 5–10 year penalties, nationwide forensic labs, mandatory watermarks, and public awareness drives to reclaim truth before synthetics shred society's trust.
Keywords: Deepfakes, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, IT Act, digital evidence, legal reforms
