The digital revolution and the rapid proliferation of Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies have fundamentally transformed the landscape of personal identity and its protection under law. Among the most alarming manifestations of this transformation is the emergence of deepfakes hyper-realistic, AI-generated audio-visual simulations that replicate an individual’s voice, likeness, and mannerisms without consent. India, like most jurisdictions, lacks a dedicated statutory framework for protecting personality rights against such technologically sophisticated violations. The existing legal architecture comprising the Copyright Act, 1957, the Trade Marks Act, 1999, the Information Technology Act, 2000, and tortious principles of passing off provides only fragmented, reactive protection, leaving significant legislative gaps that adversely affect celebrities, public figures, and ordinary citizens alike. Indian courts have, through a series of landmark judgments spanning three decades, fashioned a judicially crafted doctrine of personality rights grounded in the fundamental right to privacy and dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution. From the Auto Shankar case (1994) to the recent wave of injunctions in 2025 involving celebrities such as Abhishek Bachchan, Ravi Shankar, Asha Bhosle, and Sunil Shetty, the judiciary has demonstrated remarkable adaptability. However, judicial innovation alone cannot substitute for comprehensive legislative action, particularly in an era where deepfake content spreads virally across global platforms within hours. This paper undertakes a doctrinal and comparative analysis of the existing legal framework for personality rights in India, examines the specific threats posed by deepfake technology, critiques the inadequacy of current statutory provisions, and proposes a dedicated Personality Rights Protection Act. It further draws upon comparative models from the United States, the European Union, and emerging international consensus under the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) to recommend a comprehensive, technology-responsive legislative regime for India.