The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday, 15 July 2025, agreed to examine a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking directions to rein in unethical digital solicitation and professional misconduct by advocates on social media platforms. The PIL alleges that influencer-style legal content and promotional activities are steadily eroding the dignity of the legal profession.

Bench Order and Next Hearing

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice V. Mohana issued notice on the petition and made it returnable on 15 September 2026. 'Issue notice, returnable on 15.09.2026,' the CJI Kant-led bench said in its order, while also permitting 'dasti, in addition.'

What the PIL Seeks

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

The plea contends 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 platforms such as Instagram, YouTube, and Facebook.

Key Allegations in the Petition

According to the petition, a substantial portion of such content is recorded inside court premises — corridors and waiting halls — with advocates appearing in full court attire. Videos frequently display 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 plea stated.

The petition argued that the prohibition against advertisement cannot be circumvented by labelling promotional content as 'legal awareness,' 'educational videos,' or 'know your rights' campaigns. 'The true test is the substance and dominant purpose of the communication,' it said, adding that '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.'

The plea further contended that the use of advocates' robes, bands, and court premises for digital content creation amounts to a direct violation of 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 stated.

Prior Regulatory Measures Cited

The petitioners referenced several earlier actions, including the Madras High Court's judgment of 3 July 2024 against lawyer rankings and digital solicitation, the Bar Council of India's advisory of 17 March 2025 warning of disciplinary action against promotional activities through influencers and celebrities, and the Supreme Court Bar Association's resolution prohibiting videography and creation of reels within the apex court premises.

The petitioners also noted that they had submitted a detailed representation on 2 July to the CJI and the BCI Chairman seeking immediate regulatory intervention, but no effective nationwide framework has since been put in place.

What Happens Next

The matter is now listed for hearing before the Supreme Court on 15 September 2026. The BCI and other relevant authorities are expected to file their responses in the intervening period. How the court ultimately defines the boundary between genuine legal education and commercial self-promotion could set a precedent reshaping how India's legal community engages with social media.