New Delhi, July 13 (IANS) A public interest litigation (PIL) has been moved before the Supreme Court seeking directions to curb unethical digital solicitation and professional misconduct by advocates on social media platforms, alleging that the growing trend of influencer-style legal content, promotional reels and misuse of court premises is eroding the dignity and ethical foundations of the legal profession.

The writ petition, filed by advocates Anil Pandey and A.R. Tripathi under Article 32 of the Constitution, has sought directions to the Bar Council of India (BCI) to frame and enforce a comprehensive regulatory framework governing advocates’ conduct on digital platforms and to ensure strict implementation of the Advocates Act, 1961 and the Bar Council of India Rules.

The plea contended that despite statutory safeguards prohibiting direct and indirect solicitation by advocates, there has been an “unprecedented proliferation” of promotional reels, influencer-style videos, monetised legal content and paid collaborations across social media platforms such as Instagram, YouTube and Facebook.

According to the petition, a substantial portion of such content is recorded inside court premises, corridors and waiting halls while advocates appear in full court attire, with videos frequently displaying contact details, claims of expertise, client testimonials and sensational legal commentary aimed at attracting prospective litigants.

“The petitioners seek this Hon’ble Court’s intervention against the rampant and unchecked proliferation of digital solicitation, the commercialisation of advocacy, and the flagrant misuse of judicial precincts by certain members of the Bar,” the petition said. It added that these activities “represent a systematic subversion of the Advocates Act, 1961, and the Bar Council of India Rules, thereby threatening the very dignity and integrity of the administration of justice.”

The petition argued that the prohibition against advertisement cannot be bypassed merely by portraying promotional content as legal awareness or educational videos. “The prohibition against advertisement cannot be defeated merely by describing promotional content as ‘legal awareness’, ‘educational videos’ or ‘know your rights’ campaigns. The true test is the substance and dominant purpose of the communication,” the plea stated.

“Where the primary object is self-promotion, acquisition of clientele or enhancement of commercial visibility, the activity constitutes professional misconduct irrespective of the terminology employed.” It further alleged that the use of advocates’ robes, bands and court premises for creating digital content amounts to a direct violation of the BCI Rules.

“Court attire is an institutional symbol representing the majesty of law and the dignity of judicial proceedings. It cannot be converted into an instrument of branding, publicity or commercial promotion,” the petition said, adding that court premises “cannot be transformed into locations for social media content creation or influencer marketing”.

The plea claimed that social media algorithms increasingly reward sensational legal content through visibility, followers and monetisation, resulting in advocates competing on digital popularity instead of professional competence and integrity.

Referring to previous regulatory measures, the petition referred to the Madras High Court’s July 3, 2024 judgment against lawyer rankings and digital solicitation, subsequent BCI press releases, the Bar Council of India’s March 17, 2025 advisory warning of disciplinary action against promotional activities through influencers and celebrities, and the Supreme Court Bar Association’s resolution prohibiting videography and reels within the apex court premises.

The petitioners said they had submitted a detailed representation on July 2 to the Chief Justice of India (CJI) and the BCI Chairman seeking immediate regulatory intervention, but no effective nationwide framework has been evolved to address the issue. As per the case status reflected on the Supreme Court’s official website, the PIL is listed for hearing on Tuesday before a Bench of CJI Surya Kant, and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana.

–IANS

pds/uk