The Legal profession in India is not merely an occupation, trade, business or avenue of personal publicity. It is a noble and learned profession, integrally connected with the administration of justice. An Advocate is an officer of the Court, a privileged member of the community and a participant in the solemn process of justice.
On 17 July 2026, the Bar Council of India (BCI) circulated a framework governing the use of social media by advocates, law students and interns, addressing issues such as reels and videos from court premises, misuse of professional identity, legal misinformation, confidentiality breaches, AI-generated content, deepfakes and digital solicitation.
Key Highlights:
-
The BCI has directed all State Bar Councils and Centres of Legal Education to immediately adopt and implement guidelines relating to social media conduct, digital ethics, court decorum, confidentiality and professional responsibility.
-
The circular cautions advocates, law students and interns against creating or circulating reels, videos, short clips, memes, promotional posts and other social media content depicting court premises, judicial proceedings, chambers and professional work in a manner inconsistent with professional ethics.
-
The BCI has expressed concern over selective clipping of live-streamed court proceedings, sensationalised content and posts that may undermine public confidence in the judiciary.
-
The BCI reiterated that live-streamed court proceedings are intended to promote transparency and access to justice and cannot be clipped, edited, monetised, sensationalised or used to ridicule judicial proceedings.
-
Relying on judicial precedents including Swapnil Tripathi v. Supreme Court of India, (2018) 10 SCC 639, Harish Uppal v. Union of India, (2003) 2 SCC 45 and R. Muthukrishnan v. High Court of Madras, (2019) 16 SCC 407, the BCI emphasised that professional ethics, court decorum, confidentiality and dignity of judicial institutions extend to digital and social media conduct.
-
The BCI noted that the Kerala High Court Advocates Association had earlier cautioned advocates against making videos and reels in and around High Court premises and appreciated the initiative as a step towards preserving the dignity of courts and the legal profession.
-
The BCI referred to the Supreme Court’s notice in Anil Pandey v. Bar Council of India (W.P. (C) No. 817 of 2026), decided on 14 July 2026, where concerns were raised regarding promotional reels, monetised legal content, influencer collaborations, client testimonials and digital self-promotion by advocates.
-
The petition also seeks the formulation of a comprehensive Digital Ethics Code and a Code of Digital Professional Conduct for the legal profession.
-
The BCI stated that the circular is a considered institutional response developed through a dedicated sub-committee constituted on 8 June 2026 and approved by the General Council on 11 July 2026.
-
The circular addresses the growing problem of legal misinformation, including fake judgments, fabricated citations, manipulated court records, misleading legal summaries, false claims of appearance, fabricated client testimonials and legal advice by unqualified persons.
-
The circular cautions against content that crosses the line from legal education into solicitation, misinformation, impersonation, breach of confidentiality, manufactured authority, commercial self-promotion and sensationalism.
-
Advocates have been reminded that social media content may amount to indirect advertising or solicitation, which is prohibited under the Bar Council of India Rules.
-
Referring to Sections 7, 35 and 49 of the Advocates Act, 1961 and Rule 36 of the Bar Council of India Rules, the BCI reiterated that advocates cannot use social media for direct or indirect advertising, solicitation, client acquisition or commercial self-promotion.
-
The BCI emphasised that the legal profession is not merely an occupation, trade or business, but a noble and learned profession integrally connected with the administration of justice, and that an advocate is an officer of the Court.
-
Referring to V.C. Rangadurai v. D. Gopalan, (1979) 1 SCC 308, the BCI reiterated that professional discipline is intended to protect the public, the courts and the integrity of the legal profession.
-
Referring to the Preamble to Chapter II, Part VI of the Bar Council of India Rules, the BCI stated that advocates must conduct themselves in a manner befitting their status as officers of the Court and remain bound by duties of dignity, restraint and professional ethics even in their digital and social media conduct.
-
The BCI clarified that the circular does not create a new ethical code but applies existing professional obligations concerning dignity, confidentiality, fair conduct, avoidance of solicitation and proper use of professional identity to digital platforms and social media.
-
The BCI has prohibited the creation, publication or circulation of AI-generated images, deepfake videos, voice-cloned audio, face-swapped visuals and other synthetic content falsely depicting judges, courts, advocates, litigants, clients or court proceedings.
-
The circular emphasises that advocates and interns must not disclose confidential client information, case strategy, chamber discussions, pleadings, drafts, settlement communications or privileged professional material.
-
The BCI stressed that advocate-client privilege and confidentiality extend to internships, chamber work, drafting, research assignments, client conferences and other professional interactions.
-
Law students and interns have been directed not to publish ‘day in court’, ‘day in chamber’, ‘lawyer life’, internship-related or courtroom-content that trivialises court work or breaches confidentiality.
-
The BCI cautioned that law students, interns and researchers may participate in legal literacy and academic discussions but cannot hold themselves out as advocates or as persons authorised to practise law or provide professional legal services.
-
Every Centre of Legal Education has been directed to:
-
Conduct sensitisation and orientation sessions;
-
Obtain a separate undertaking from students at admission and before every internship;
-
Incorporate the guidelines into internship and institutional conduct policies; and
-
Maintain records of compliance measures.
-
-
State Bar Councils have been directed to circulate the circular to all enrolled advocates and recognised Bar Associations and establish mechanisms for awareness, complaint handling and implementation.
-
The BCI has directed State Bar Councils to establish Digital Ethics Committees, nodal officers and dedicated complaint mechanisms for receiving complaints, preserving evidence and examining alleged violations.
-
The BCI clarified that responsible legal awareness content, academic discussions, neutral case-law updates, constitutional literacy and accurate legal reporting remain permissible, provided they are not misleading, promotional or sensational in nature.
-
The BCI has prescribed standalone affidavits for enrolment applicants and separate undertakings for law students at the time of admission and before internships to reinforce awareness of professional obligations.
-
The BCI stated that social media and digital ethics compliance should be acknowledged through standalone affidavits and undertakings, and not through clauses embedded in general enrolment or admission forms.
-
The circular also proposes the creation of a BCI Digital Ethics Nodal Cell and platform liaison mechanisms with social media intermediaries for addressing digital misconduct and unethical online content.
-
The circular proposes classification of digital misconduct into minor, serious and aggravated breaches, with proportionate corrective, regulatory or disciplinary responses.
-
The BCI clarified that violations may attract disciplinary proceedings, referral to Bar Councils, reporting to courts, withdrawal of internships, platform complaints or other action permissible under law depending on the nature and severity of the misconduct.
-
The BCI emphasised that implementation of the circular should remain preventive, educative and proportionate, and must not be used for personal rivalry, moral policing or suppression of lawful criticism.
[BCI Circular on Social Media Use, dt. 17-7-2026]
