In a world where current events are announced first through Instagram stories, YouTube whistleblowers get famous in a night, and hashtags are going viral faster than a court ruling, courtroom justice is no longer local. From influencers posting legal “hot takes” to truck-mounted campaigns and emotional YouTube appeals, the courtroom has got a new stage – your phone screen.
But what happens when public opinion on social media begins to shape legal narratives? Has the time come to witness the creation of a second legal system – the one based on likes, shares, and followers?
The Rise of the Hashtag Verdict
Remember #JusticeForSSR? Or #BoycottBollywood after the Aryan Khan drug case? These were not only trends; they turned into digital trials. Despite no evidence was brought to court, social media users had already made their decision. A trending hashtag seemed more credible to many than a legal order.
Now, newer cases like Justice for Atul Subhash have followed the same trajectory. In December 2024, Subhash, a Bengaluru-based executive, died by suicide, leaving behind a detailed note and video accusing his in-laws of harassment. A truck with a hoarding demanding justice for him started circulating in the city, mobilizing support. Conducted by a men’s rights group, this campaign was an example of how the battle for justice is becoming increasingly visible both on the roads and in virtual communities.[1]
In a similar case, a 40-year-old bakery owner in Delhi recently died by suicide, echoing Subhash’s ordeal. Before ending his life, he recorded a 59-minute video alleging harassment by his wife and in-laws. His death has sparked renewed calls for awareness and reform regarding matrimonial harassment, once again highlighting how social media is amplifying these issues and fueling public outrage.[2]
Digital campaigns tend to get a lot of attention when traditional methods of reaching out to people through the service of technology appear to be ineffective in solving the problem. As a matter of fact, they do not only advocate for the voice of those who feel left out by the institutions but also encourage the masses to make a call on the issues at hand. However, one of the many setbacks of such campaigns is that they may be transforming the multifaceted legal aspects into simple emotional situations where the position of the perpetrator and the victim is quite clear, and often, without due process.
Trial by Reel: The New Influence of “Legal Influencers”
Legal content creators are the new influencers in the field of law. They have taken charge of bringing legal education to the public. From law students breaking down landmark judgments to YouTubers like Sameer M.D., who recently revived the unsolved 2012 Soujanya murder case through a viral video, legal commentary is everywhere. Sameer’s 39-minute exposé garnered over 1.8 crore views, reigniting debate and calls to reopen the case.[3]
While this digital advocacy brings legal awareness to the masses, it also raises critical questions: Are such narratives balanced? Can content go viral without becoming biased or inflammatory? And are court supposed to keep up with YouTube’s algorithm?
Sameer’s case is a prime example. Although he used publicly available materials, his strong tone and storytelling style led many viewers to draw conclusions not yet validated by courts. A section of the public even tried to communalize the issue, targeting the content creator’s religious identity. This shows how quickly legal debates can spiral into social and political controversies online.
The Double-Edged Sword of Visibility
One-way social networks have certainly changed the legal system is by making it a lot more visible. The victims of abuse and discrimination now have the resources to go public with their stories if the institutions do not help them. Movements like #MeToo thrived because of this.
One of the aftereffects is the possibility of cancel culture and mob justice, that is when the action is taken against the one accused online before the actual trial. The idea that a person is innocent before proven guilty, a basic issue of law, is frequently not taken into consideration.
Recently, the Mahakumbh incident involving ‘Kante Wale Baba’ sparked similar outrage. A viral video showed a woman confronting the elderly seer, drawing mixed reactions. While some backed her, many netizens accused her of harassment, demanding police action. This polarization showed how digital judgment can shift instantly, often without context.[4]
This incident rekindled the debate on whether social media is enabling accountability or simply fueling outrage. The fact that the crowd sided with the girl and then later netizens turned against her shows how quickly perceptions shift, depending on who controls the narrative in the moment.
When Viral Videos Spark Real-World Action
The other incident that demonstrates how viral content can lead to justice was the Kancha Gachibowli deforestation case. A video capturing peacocks crying as bulldozers razed trees in a 400-acre forest near Hyderabad Central University sparked online outrage. Students protested, and the Supreme Court took suo motu cognizance of the incident. The issue was even raised in the Rajya Sabha, all catalyzed by a video on social media.[5]
When Digital Justice Becomes a Demand
While courts remain the pillars of justice, social media has emerged as a platform for demands, grievances, and collective voice. The challenge lies in making sure that this voice enhances justice and not distorts it.
The viral nature of these cases highlights both the power and peril of digital justice. This new form of revealing can bring about positive changes, serving the purpose of getting the offenders to take the responsibility. However, the lack of control and regulation will also ensure that the wrong judgment prevails, the majority’s wildest emotions run, and social media gets divided into hostile groups.
As aspiring legal professionals, we must navigate this terrain with sensitivity and reason. Advocating through social media must be tempered with responsibility, ensuring that every “justice for” post doesn’t inadvertently become a judgment before trial.
Should Instagram Be Your Legal Textbook?
Thanks to social media, learning about the law has been diffused widely, as many different individuals who are not lawyers can have access to this kind of information from platforms like Instagram and YouTube. Humorous legal memes and informative reels can engage an audience, but the audience must understand that such materials only set the stage for the discussion and never conclude it.
Both as students of the legal profession and as citizens, we, who are the core of this society, should be able to access information thoughtfully. Numerous users may easily have access to more than one law-related opinion, but in the same reasoning, one must also remember to ask himself/herself questions like: Is it true? Is it fair? Is it considering the other side?
Legal education online can bridge gaps, but it must be anchored in clarity, context, and credibility. Sensationalism may get views, but it rarely leads to justice.
The Verdict: From the Courtroom to the Timeline
Social media is not the courtroom, but it’s definitely the public gallery. Ever since social media first entered the communication era, it has been able to disseminate the voices, throw the searchlight on the truth, and bring the top authority into the witness box. However, there is a condition that has to be met: the role of digital media is not an alternative to the legal process.
Justice should not be biased, one-sided, or manipulated by technology.
As future lawyers, policy thinkers, and informed citizens, we must learn to distinguish between outrage and advocacy, emotion and evidence, trend and truth. The feed may be fast, but justice, by design, is slow – and for good reason.
Author(s) Name: Nishi Joshi (Campus Law Centre, Faculty of Law, University of Delhi)
References:
[1] Anagha Deshpande, ‘‘Justice for Atul Subhash’: Truck hoarding in Bengaluru demands action after suicide case’ Hindustan Times (28 February 2025) < https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/bengaluru-news/justice-for-atul-subhash-truck-hoarding-in-bengaluru-demands-action-after-suicide-case-101740712531919.html> accessed 15 April 2025
[2] Rishabh Sharma, ‘Delhi bakery owner dies by suicide in Atul Subhash-like case: All we know’ Business Standard (2 January 2025) < https://www.business-standard.com/india-news/delhi-bakery-owner-dies-by-suicide-in-atul-subhash-like-case-all-we-know-125010200861_1.html> accessed 15 April 2025
[3] Vikhar Ahmed Sayeed, ‘YouTube video rekindles demand for justice in Karnataka’s 13-year-old murder case’ Frontline (10 March 2025) < https://frontline.thehindu.com/news/soujanya-murder-case-dharmasthala-youtube-video-sameer-justice-karnataka/article69313139.ece> accessed 16 April 2025
[4] Madhuri Adnal, ‘Kaante Wale Baba Harassed By Woman At Maha Kumbh: Netizens Demand Justice’ Oneindia (21 January 2025) < https://www.oneindia.com/india/kaante-wale-baba-harassed-by-woman-at-maha-kumbh-netizens-demand-justice-4048765.html> accessed 15 April 2025
[5] Akriti Anand, ‘Kancha Gachibowli: Mass deforestation near Hyderabad University, peacocks ‘cry’, SC intervenes — All you need to know’ Livemint (4 April 2025) < https://www.livemint.com/news/india/kancha-gachibowli-deforestation-hyderabad-university-student-protest-peacocks-cry-sc-intervenes-all-you-need-to-know-11743743643118.html> accessed 16 April 2025
