Beyond The Courtroom - The Impact Of Social Media On High-Profile Cases In The Era Of 21st Century
Author: LawSphereX
Category: Technology, Cyber & Privacy
Published:
Updated:
BEYOND THE COURTROOM: THE IMPACT OF SOCIAL
MEDIA ON HIGH-PROFILE CASES IN THE ERA OF 21ST
CENTURY
Arpita Jain, Narsee Monjee Institute of Management and Studies, Navi Mumbai Kanishka Shukla, Narsee Monjee Institute of Management and Studies, Navi Mumbai
ABSTRACT
With social media becoming a common part of human life by each passing day, it is not surprising that even our legal system is not isolated from social media, social media has been a boon as well as a bane, it has changed many things and one of them is perception regarding how high profile cases are perceived, handled and decided. This research focuses mainly on the effect of social media on the legal system and particularly on high profile cases, This study looks into how the opinion of the public is influenced by the social media often creating narratives even before the trial begins, along with the influence on public opinion it further studies on the impact of social media trial/ media trial on the legal proceedings such as jury selection and biases, and general courtroom dynamics answering the question Are Judges Influenced By Parallel Trials?
Also this study examines the impact of social media on different high profile cases from past decade by studying individual case studies and deducing both the positive and negative role of social media has played in the outcomes of these prominent cases, calling into question the legal system’s ability to remain impartial in the digital era. With the access of social media to almost everyone in the world, now defendants, victims and their families are subjected to the intense public scrutiny which can have negative impact on their mental health increasing the stress of legal process, this research will look into the psychological effect on defendant, victim and their families.
This research does not only emphasise on the fact of social media being double edge sword acting as both informant and disrupter but also focused on the importance of legal reforms needed in the era of social media giving solutions for guaranteeing fairness and protection in high profile cases. Keywords: social media, high-profile cases, public opinion, legal process, ethics, mental health, justice system.
INTRODUCTION
“A responsible media is the handmaiden of effective judicial administration. ” Lord Atkins once stated that "Liberty corrupts into licence and is prone to abuse. " Every institution is susceptible to abuse, and every liberty, if left unchecked, has the potential to become a license that leads to disorder and anarchy. 1The statement is still true today. With democracy spreading its wings and citizens becoming more wise and knowledgeable about the operation of government and its functions. The functioning of courts is becoming more public by the day. The media serves as the country's fourth pillar, holding the other three organs of democracy in check. It is responsible to report on important problems objectively. But ever since it was founded, the media has been abusing its influence to erode the authority of the courts by straying from morality.
Even before the actual copies are given to the parties to the lawsuit, the media's coverage of the trials sparks arguments, discussions, and the public release of the rulings. Judges and solicitors face a significant issue in that they must respond to public debates and conversations as well; if not directly, then at least indirectly, which nearly becomes their job. While it is true that judges are not allowed to explicitly respond to these never-ending public discussions, lawyers are nonetheless starting to appear more frequently on media outlets. India saw a significant upsurge in December 2012 when the Delhi Rape Case became public. People began to gather, and the public's outcry was so intense that the government was compelled to establish a special committee to revise the laws pertaining to violence against women.
This committee's work resulted in new acts and amendments to existing laws.. Given how widely reported the case was, one can only assume that the trial court judge's mind was under extreme mental strain. These things are released by a variety of outlets, the most significant of which is the press, or media. More recently, in the last five to six years, a new form of media has emerged that is referred to as social media. Social media include websites and programs that facilitate rapid and effective content sharing among users. Because social media can be accessed via computers, tablets, and smartphones, it has become an essential part of everyone's life. According to Aristotle, man is a social animal. Social media provides a platform that makes achieving this goal simple. But media involvement in cases that are still pending has become a regular occurrence.
Social media allows people to openly express their thoughts without any barriers to contact. The lack of any barriers to communication indicates 1 Express Newspapers Vs. U. O. I. , (1997) 1 SCC 133. See also re:Harijai Singh and re:Vijayakumar, AIR 1997 SC 73 wherein the Supreme Court of India has observed that the freedom of press is regarded as “the mother of all liberties in a democratic society”.
that the views and opinions stated are available to a worldwide audience and have the potential to effectively frame the views of others. Social media typically sensationalises news by painting the accused as a villain, which damages the accused's dignity and isn't founded on the facts. Through their trial, the media tries to reinvent itself as a "public court" and meddle in court cases. It disregards the crucial distinction between a defendant and a convicted person, endangering the tenets of "guilt beyond a reasonable doubt" and "presumption of innocence until proven guilty." Ray Surette claims that "Trial by Media" consists of three main flavours:
1) The rich and sinful kind. 2. Evil stranger, mad killer. 3. The Trial of Power Abuse. The
media perpetuates this myth. Therefore, it is imperative to control the media and set reasonable limitations in order to prevent the undermining of court decisions in the near future.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:
This research study will employ a qualitative method, specifically a content analysis approach, to explore the impact of social media on high-profile cases. Through a rigorous examination of existing literature, academic journals, and reputable online sources, this research will gather and analyse secondary data to identify themes, patterns, and trends in how social media influence’s public opinion, media coverage, and legal proceedings in high-profile cases. By adopting a qualitative method, this study aims to provide an in-depth understanding of the complex dynamics between social media and high-profile cases, contributing to the existing body of knowledge in this field.
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES:
To Analyze the role of social media in shaping public opinion during high profile cases. • To Examine the Impact of Social Media on Legal Proceedings and Courtroom Dynamics • To Analyze the specific case studies to evaluate the extent to which social media has influenced the outcomes of high-profile cases. • To analyze the impact of social media on mental health of defendant, victims and their families in high profile cases
RESEARCH QUESTIONS:
What is the overall impact of social media on high profile cases and how does it shape their outcome? • How can legal professionals and the justice system adapt to the influence of social media on high profile cases? • How does social media affect the well-being of the defendants and their families?
ROLE OF SOCIAL MEDIA IN SHAPING PUBLIC OPINION DURING CRIMINAL
CASES
Social media has dramatically changed how public opinion is formed, especially during highprofile legal cases. Platforms like X (formerly Twitter), Facebook, and Instagram allow information to spread instantly, reaching millions of people in a moment. This rapid sharing can have both positive and negative effects: while it allows more people to stay informed, for suppose taking the example of most recent heart-breaking case of Kolkata wherein Dr.
Moumita was raped and murdered in the premises of hospital itself and with the help of social media it gained the prominence which it deserves and came into highlight, social media allowed access to such information to millions of people and help them to practise their fundamental right of being informed as well as allows us to exercise the fundamental right of speech and expression by helping us to share our opinion and demand justice on behalf of the aggrieved one by society as whole with the ulterior motive of “united we stand, united we succeed”, this is not the single instance when whole society came together as one to fight against such evil there are many cases like Delhi gang rape case, in which social media platforms helped in spreading awareness about the case, mobilise protest and demand justice for the victim.
But at the same time it also creates an environment where unverified or misleading information can easily circulate, because the media often uses dramatical and sensational narratives to attract public attention for example in certain cases the media focuses on socio-economic background of the suspect or victim, highlighting aspects that are not directly related to criminal event itself like in the case of Sheena bora murder case, media thoroughly covered Indrani Mukherjee’s personal life, including her relationship, family dynamics and past struggles, which some argues was excessive and unrelated to the crime. This creates stigma
towards already vulnerable groups in society. One sided or repetitive coverage can also influence people views on justice and the legal process. The case of Aarushi Talwar murder case (2013) is a paradigmatic example of how one sided and repetitive media coverage can shape public opinion, the media focused extensively on the prosecution’s theory while ignoring the defence arguments and alternative theories, it created the public narrative that the accused parents Rajesh and Nupur Talwar were guilty of murdering their daughter Aarushi Talwar which created the public mindset that the accused were guilty undermining the presumption of innocence. The results of interviews with community members show that the consumption of news about criminal cases affects the way they perceive perpetrators and victims.
Information received from the media is often accepted without further verification, so people's perceptions are heavily influenced by the way the media presents the news. Intense and continuous coverage of a particular case can make people feel that their intense and continuous coverage of a particular case can make people feel that their neighbourhood is more dangerous than it actually is, increasing fear and anxiety. The results of interviews with community members show that the consumption of news about criminal cases affects the way they perceive perpetrators and victims. Information received from the media is often accepted without further verification, so people's perceptions are heavily influenced by the way the media presents the news.
Intense and continuous coverage of a particular case can make people feel that their One of the most noticeable effects of social media on high-profile cases is how it amplifies certain narratives. As people engage with these posts, they help shape a collective story that may not always reflect the full picture. This crowd-driven storytelling can lead to the public forming opinions based on selective information rather than a balanced understanding of the case. it can also affect the legal process itself.
For example the News articles like the one published by Dhananjay Mahapatra titled “SC took 10 cases suo Motu but most remain inconclusive” 2shows how media and prominent newspapers can help spread unprecedented hazardous information without actually using defamatory remarks but using selective excerpts from judgements at a time when the society was shocked to its core in the Kolkata rape murder
2 Times of India. (2024, September 2). Supreme Court took up 10 cases suo motu in 2024, most remain
inconclusive. The Times of India. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/supreme-court-took-up-10-casessuo-motu-in-2024-most-remain-inconclusive/articleshow/112635251.cms
case. Information received from the media is often accepted without further verification, so people's perceptions are heavily influenced by the way the media presents the news. Intense and continuous coverage of a particular case can make people feel that their neighbourhood is more dangerous than it actually is, increasing fear and anxiety. So it can be concluded that the consumption of news about criminal cases affects the way public perceives the perpetrator and victims.
Social media is floating with plenty of news, and authenticity of news is becoming questionable because when each person is given liberty to report the news then spreading of false and inaccurate information also becomes very common and once disinformation has taken its root it becomes very difficult to rectify it and even if it is rectified the perception made in a human mind cannot be changed even after the truth is revealed, taking the live example of Sushant Singh Rajput’s Death, his death became the concern of national interest and everyone was ready with their narrative about who is behind his death, and a flood of false information about his girlfriend Rhea Chakraborty was published, she was accused with murder and many other allegations were made on her like introducing Sushant to narcotics, interfering with his medical treatment and blackmailing him, these were the unfound charges made by many news platform and social media which resulted in furious backlash against Rhea, people were demanding for her arrest even before the trial began, and on later investigation there was no evidence to back up these charges and she was granted free, The case of Rhea exemplifies the hazards of misinformation which may lead to the character assassination of the one who has been falsely accused of the crime causing such person reputational damage and mental health issue.
It’s not only the reporters who indeed for TRP are making sensational heading and influencing public opinion but also professionals engaged in high profile cases like attorney or advocates are using social media for their advantage, as social media give everyone to keep their opinion forth, sometimes advocates keeping their side of story or by putting emphasis on the particular information can sway public opinion even before the matter is fully heard, and this approach has resulted in what some people call as media trial in which individual make decisions without waiting for the court case to get finish.
It also has to be keep in mind that the influence of social media does not stop at swaying public opinion, but it can affect the whole legal system as judges, jury, witnesses are the part of same world where social media is dominating life and being human they can’t entirely escape what is being discussed online by millions of people,
the ears can’t be shut as and when they want. So now let’s delve into the realm of social media’s impact inside the coutrooms and also in the minds of judges.
IMPACT OF SOCIAL MEDIA ON LEGAL PROCEEDINGS AND JUDGE’S
DECISION.
India is a democratic country having its three pillar intact i. e Executive, legislature and judiciary, and Media is considered as the fourth pillar of democracy, as we know that judiciary need to kept separate from other two organs, similarly media is supposed to be separated from judiciary and its interference with judiciary can cause loss of faith in the democracy or the judicial system of the country. But Media today has evolved into Janta Adalat and has begun to intervene with the functioning of legal system. And because of which anytime a sensitive issue is brought before the court, the attention of public is predicted to be increased in curiosity.
Media is always looking forward to the sensational news, and on receiving any such news all sort of media be it traditional form like newspaper or social media, it starts publishing their interpretation of facts which is commonly known as investigative journalism and is not prohibited in India, but the influence of media coverage on an individual by creating an expression of innocence or guilt even before the decision is delivered by court is called media trial which incriminates a fair trial which amounts to undue influence with the "administration of justice In a few situations, the media's efforts led to the delivery of justice. The Jessica Lal murder case was delayed because all of the witnesses became hostile, and the offender, Manu Sharma, was acquitted. The media then helped to secure justice through the 'Justice for Jessica' movement.
Similarly, in the Priyadarshini Mattoo case, the 'justice for Jessica' campaign affected the trial of the defendants accused of rape and murder. The subsequent media engagement hastened the case investigation, and the accused was convicted. Another aspect to consider is how the public ridiculed eminent lawyer Ram Jethmalani for his choice to defend Manu Sharma which is a hindrance in the professional duty owed by a lawyer to provide adequate representation to everyone alike. This brings us to the tension that is present between social media and professional ethics where lawyers might second guess before taking up a case of an accused who has the right to be defended. This is evidence to show that it not only affects the courtroom but also the professional responsibilities of a lawyer.
The same situation arises in the case of Kapil Sibal who is representing the accused in the Kolkata murder case. However,
in the BMW hit-and-run case, the accused was captured after a TV station conducted a sting operation that revealed the accused's lawyer was paying witnesses. However, there have been instances where the media produced a frenzy due to its reporting. In the Aarushi Talwar murder case, the media showed a gross contempt for the law. The media coverage of this case raised major legal questions about invasion of privacy, breach of confidence, and defamation of living and deceased individuals. The Sheena Bora Murder case also raised the question of reporting on the accused's trial proceedings, as every aspect of her life was under public inspection, which had nothing to do with the case. The newest media trial in the Sushant Singh Rajput death case serves as a stark reminder that media trials harm not only the guilty, but also the victim and their relatives.
In high-profile cases, the court of public opinion frequently runs alongside the court of law, providing a difficult atmosphere for judicial neutrality. So the question arose: Are Judges Influenced By Parallel Trials? It remains to be seen whether parallel trials impact a trial judge. For such, it is worth quoting Justice Frankfurter from a historic ruling over the media trial by the United States Supreme Court. “No Judge fit to be one is likely to be influenced consciously, except by what he sees or hears in Court and by what is judicially appropriate for his deliberations. However, Judges are also human and we know better than did our forebears how powerful is the pull of the unconscious and how treacherous the rational process ... and since Judges, however stalwart, are human, the delicate task of administering justice ought not to be made unduly difficult by irresponsible print.
”3 Also In another celebrated judgment on media trial Hon’ble Supreme Court quoted from Viscount Dilhorne: “It is sometimes asserted that no judge will be influenced in his judgment by anything said by the media and consequently that the need to prevent the publication of matter prejudicial to the hearing of a case only exists where the decision rests with laymen. This claim to judicial superiority over human frailty is one that I find some difficulty in accepting. Every holder of a judicial office does his utmost not to let his mind be affected by what he has seen or heard or read outside the court and he will not knowingly let himself be influenced in any way by the media. Nevertheless it should, I think, be recognised that a man
3 John D. Pennekamp v. State of Florida (1946) 328 US 331)
may not be able to put that which he has seen, heard or read entirely out of his mind and that he may be subconsciously affected by it. ” 4 So, it can be argued that the influence of media on a judge's mind is a practical reality that must be dealt with in order to provide justice. The judiciary, as the defender and protector of the right to free speech and media expression, has vigorously protected this right against invasion by other departments of government whenever it has occurred5. However, because social media is unorganised and uncontrolled, the threat from it is immediate and far greater than that from other departments of government and pillars of democracy. Judges, despite their professional duty to remain unbiased, are not immune to the influence of popular opinion.
Exposure to strong Public opinions: Although judges being the impartial entity but is exposed to strong public opinion, misinformation floating on the internet and public speculation about the case outcome on which judges are presiding, and as we learned that it a reality that judges cannot escape from the influence of media and these public strong opinions may subconsciously affect their decision making process. Societal pressure and public sentiment involvement: In high profile cases social media often creates narratives swaying the public sentiments, and once the public is involved and come forward as one asking for the justice, the judges may feel pressure consciously or unconsciously to align with the public opinion or to give decision which they feel will be publicly accepted.
Bias and Prejudice formation: judges being human has their own beliefs and biases and when they are exposed to the social media it can reinforce a judge's pre-existing beliefs or biases, whether consciously or unconsciously which can potentially affect their judgment, for example when a Judge is repeatedly encountered by a narratives on social media that portrays defendant as a guilty it can reinforce a confirmation bias of the judges influencing their interpretation of the case, also social media make an echo chamber where only specific viewpoints are promoted and if judges become the part of such eco chamber it may also play with the mind of their changing the perception of fact and ultimately leading to bias in their ruling. 4 Reliance Petrochemicals Ltd. v. Proprietors of Indian Express Newspapers Bombay (P. ) Ltd. , 1988(4) SCC 592 5 The Fourth K. S.
Rajamony Memorial Public Law Lecture on ‘The Constitution, the media and the Courts’ (Kochi – August 9, 2008) By Hon’ble Justice K. G. Balakrishnan, Ex. Chief Justice of India
Social Media Activity by Judges: Some judges may maintain personal social media accounts, and while many are cautious about their online presence, there remains a risk that they could inadvertently encounter opinions, comments, or information about cases they are handling. This exposure has the potential to subtly influence their perspective, even when unintended. Additionally, a judge's social media activity is subject to public scrutiny, where even an innocuous post could be misinterpreted as a sign of bias or partiality. Such interpretations can lead to challenges against the judge's decisions, with allegations that their impartiality has been compromised.
It is the fact that social media has come forward with the unique challenge to judicial impartiality and judges need to remain vigilant and follow the strict ethical guidelines making sure that their rulings are based solely on the basis of facts of the case and is not influenced by the social media narratives, this shows that the integrity of the judicial process depends on the ability of judges to maintain their impartiality in the face of these external pressures.
CASE ANALYSIS SHOWING IMPACT OF SOCIAL MEDIA ON TRIAL OUTCOME
1. Nirbhaya case (2012)
On December 16, 2012, a 23-year-old paramedic student (Nirbhaya) was brutally gang-raped and murdered in Delhi, sparking widespread outrage. Social media played a pivotal role in shaping public opinion and influencing the trial outcome. Hashtag campaigns like #JusticeForNirbhaya and #Nirbhaya garnered millions of tweets, creating immense public pressure for swift justice. This online outcry led to a fast-tracked trial, resulting in the conviction of all four accused and their subsequent death sentence. Social media's impact also contributed to amendments in India's rape laws, making them more stringent and inclusive. The case highlights the significant influence of social media on high-profile trials in India, demonstrating its potential to shape public opinion, influence the justice system, and spark widespread awareness about social issues.
2. Sheena Bora case (2012)
The impact of social media on the Sheena Bora case was multifaceted, with both positive and negative consequences. On the one hand, social media increased awareness, created public pressure for a speedy investigation and trial, and provided transparency through live updates
from the courtroom. However, it also led to sensationalism, character assassination, and the potential influence on public opinion, which may have impacted the trial outcome. Additionally, social media conducted a parallel trial, with many users pronouncing the accused guilty before the trial. Nevertheless, social media also provided some investigative leads and psychological insights into the accused's behavior. Overall, social media played a significant role in shaping the narrative around the case, highlighting its potential to both aid and hinder the justice system.
3. Aarushi Talwar Murder case (2013)
This is the case which attracted a lot of media attention and stayed in news for a long time, It is the murder case of girl named Aarushi and her home aid Hemraj, and the case was significantly influenced by the social media which fueled sensationalism, speculation and public pressure, Social media became the breeding ground for the theories of accusation and conspiracy claims and most importantly compromising the principle of “ innocent until proven guilty” by creating media or virtual trial, also public outrage and interest in the case put immense pressure on the courts and investigator, putting them behind the bars but on the contention of such ruling for lack of evidence the Allahabad High Court, which eventually acquitted them in 2017 after giving them the benefit of the doubt and deeming the evidence inadequate.
And while acquitting the Talwars in 2017, Allahabad High court observed that:” "The trial court's judgment suffered from a clear-cut bias and was based on a predetermined theory... The media's sensationalization and one-sided coverage also created a public mindset that the accused were guilty. " (Rajesh Talwar vs. State of UP, 2017). This shows how media can create a biased public narrative that can influence the justice system and impact the trial court’s judgment.
4. Vijay Mallya’s extradition case
Vijay Mallya's extradition case was significantly impacted by social media, which shaped public opinion and influenced the outcome. Social media platforms were filled with demands for Mallya's extradition and prosecution, creating public pressure that likely contributed to the UK's decision to approve his extradition in 2018. Social media also kept the public informed about the case's progress, with live updates and analysis from journalists and news outlets. Additionally, Mallya's own social media posts, which showcased his lavish lifestyle, further
angered the public and undermined his defense. Although social media didn't directly impact the court's decision, it maintained pressure on authorities and contributed to the public's perception of the case, ultimately paving the way for Mallya's return to India to face trial.
5. Ayodhya dispute
Ayodhya dispute being one of the most widely debated issue gained a lot of media attention This case has deep theological, historical, and political origins. The conflict revolves around a plot of land near Lord Rama's birthplace, Ayodhya. The major difficulties in this case were between the Hindu and Muslim populations over a plot of land that held religious significance for both Hindus and Muslims. ” Social media's impact on the Ayodhya dispute case's judgment outcome is a matter of debate. While it didn't directly influence the Supreme Court's decision, social media may have had an indirect impact by mobilizing public opinion and creating pressure on the government and judiciary to deliver a verdict that would appease the majority.
Social media platforms shaped the narrative around the case, perpetuating biases and communal rhetoric, which may have influenced the broader public discourse. Additionally, judges may have been aware of the intense public scrutiny and social media discourse surrounding the case, potentially influencing their awareness of the case's sensitivity and implications. However, the Indian judiciary's independence suggests that social media's impact, if any, was limited to shaping public perception rather than directly influencing the judgment
6. Yakub Memon Case.
Yakub Abdul Razzaq Memon (30 July 1962 - 30 July 2015) was a terrorist, and the Special Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Court convicted him of involvement in the 1993 Bombay blasts on July 27, 2007. Tiger Memon, Yakub's brother, was a prime suspect in the bombings. All of his pardon requests and appeals were denied, and on July 30, 2015, he was executed by hanging in Nagpur jail. Because of the significant media coverage of the trial, the lawyer defending the accused received harsh criticism, making it difficult for the lawyers to fulfil their ethical role of providing legal assistance to the parties involved.
7. Sushant Singh Rajput death case
Sushant Singh Rajput's (SSR) death case saw significant social media impact on judicial
proceedings and the judge's decision. Social media campaigns and hashtags created public pressure, demanding a CBI inquiry, which influenced the investigation and the Supreme Court's decision to grant permission for a CBI probe. Social media discourse and public outrage also made judges aware of the case's sensitivity, potentially influencing their awareness. Additionally, social media platforms were used to share information, evidence, and witness statements, which were considered by investigation agencies. While social media didn't directly impact the judges' decision, it shaped public opinion, influenced the investigation, and created judicial awareness, leading to fast-tracked proceedings and a CBI probe. There are series of cases where social media has impacted the judicial system both positively and negatively.
IMPACT OF SOCIAL MEDIA ON MENTAL HEALTH OF DEFENDANT, VICTIM
AND THEIR FAMILIES
In today’s fast running world, taking care of mental health has become very important, it’s like nurturing a garden- it needs attention and love to truly flourish. Social media has tremendous impact on mental health of each and every person associated with it, it has developed a sense of insecurity amongst human being, it can make you look evil and affect your mental wellbeing in every possible way it can, if social media can affect the mental health of a normal individual sitting at home doing nothing, imagine the power it holds and the impact it can have on the mental health of defendant or the victim of high profile cases when the eyes of whole nation are on him. The impact on mental health of defendant, victim and their families can be devastating, when we talk about defendant i.
e the one who is accused of crime, social media for him can be a source of increased anxiety and stress because of scrutiny and harassment done by public. Defendants face public shaming, loss of privacy it becomes difficult maintaining positive selfimage online amidst negative online commentary. For instance in the case of Rajesh Talwarfather of Aarushi Talwar was accused of murdering his daughter, social media was filled with hate messages and death threats causing immense mental distress to him and his family and this is not a one case and a onetime thing social media causes a person long term consequences and reputational damage even after the person is announced non guilty by the court. And if you are thinking that the impact of social media is limited to the mental health of accused
than making such statement is wrong, although social media is a great platform where people do come together to fight for the justice of victim but at the same time it gives stress and pain to the victim, victims and their families face trauma reliving the incident through repeated exposures to the images online, like in the case of Nirbhaya 2012 gang rape, the social media was flooded with the images and graphic details causing immense distress to her family and loved ones Similarly, in the case of Jiah Khan, who died by suicide, social media was filled with speculation and blame, adding to the trauma of her family. The families of both defendant and victim faces common impact like anxiety, depression, social isolation like in the case of death of Sushant Singh Rajput the family faced immense online harassment and blame, causing significant mental health issues.
The Indian court has also addressed the impact of social media on mental health. With supreme court stating in the case of Shreya Singhal that “social media has become a source of immense power and can be used for both good and bad” Although we have laws related to online harassment and cyber bullying, however more need to be done to protect the mental health of defendants, victims, and their families in high profile cases, the courts need to interfere and in regulating social media commentary and in insuring that the rights of all the parties are protected like done in the case Aarushi Talwar murder case the court ordered the gag on media reporting to prevent sensationalism and protect family’s privacy.
FINDINGS AND SUGGESTIONS
The following are some of the challenges that the judiciary comes across when dealing with issues of social media. Legal professionals in the judiciary including the judges must consider the advantages of openness and engagement of the general public while at the same time consider the appropriate conduct of the judiciary. Some of the ethical issues come up when judges are using social media for personal reasons because what they post may be misinterpreted. However, the use of social media is anonymous and can go viral which sometimes results in circulation of fake news and other materials that are capable of eroding the confidence of the public in the judiciary. It is therefore important to establish proper use of social media by the judiciary and other legal entities by establishing suitable policies to follow.
From the literature review and findings of this study, it can be concluded that the future of
social media and India’s judiciary will be dynamic. Potential reforms could include: • Specific Legal Frameworks: Formulating specific rules to regulate the impact of social media on the judicial cases, while at the same time preserving the rights of free speech. • Judicial Training: Conducting a seminar for the judges and legal professionals on the proper way to use the social media, with focus on the ethical concerns and guidelines. • Public Education and awareness: To create awareness of the judiciary process and the shortcoming of Social media as a source of legal information, thus developing an enlightened society. • Technological Innovations: Applying innovations in the sphere of judicial popularization and promotion of judicial system by means of using social networks and posting useful information.
The relations of social media and Indian judiciary have both the prospects and the problems. On one hand, social media is beneficial in increasing the level of openness and involvement of the public in judicial processes and, on the other hand, it is disadvantageous as it threatens the impartiality of judicial proceedings. In this case, it is not easy to determine how to tackle the challenges of the issue while preserving the main values of justice, and the opportunities that digital communication offers. That is why the regulation of the judiciary in the digital age and the definition of ethical codes remain an important task for the further development of the judiciary.
CONCLUSION
It can be concluded that Impact of social media on high profile cases is a double edges sword. On the one hand it brings public attention and spread awareness about the important social justice issues, give each and every individual a platform to speak and put forth their opinion, give voice to people who might otherwise be silent, but on the other hand it can cause serious problems, it can spread misinformation and speculation like wildfire, sway public opinion in one direction, leading to distorting view of what really happened. There are number of instances where media conducted accused trial and announced the verdict based on their investigation before the ruling of court, which is not justified because it’s the duty of court to
conduct the trial and make judgments and not the media, The media has right to discuss and comment on the case rulings but does not have the authority to start the trial by itself. The media trial hinders the pursuit of justice. And on studying various cases it can be seen that the media’s influence was clearly more damaging than positive (with few exception). The courts should exercise the adequate control over media and the most effective method to use the contempt of court to punish each and every individua breaching fundamental code of conduct. And also we human being the citizen of country has the duty to use social media in such a manner that it does not jeopardises the court’s proceeding and by doing so we can create the more just and compassionate system that prioritizes the well-being of everyone involved in the case.
REFERENCES
1. Dhull, Ravinder Singh. "Impact and Effect of Social Media on Indian Judiciary."
Ravinder Singh Dhull, 21 Sept. 2016, http://ravindersinghdhull.net/2016/09/21/impactand-effect-of-social-media-on-indian-judiciary/.
2. Famous
Cases of Media Trials in India." iPleaders, Oct. 2020, https://blog.ipleaders.in/famous-cases-media-trials-india/amp/.
3. News18. "Nirbhaya’s Father on Netflix’s Delhi Crime: Don’t Want to Watch It Because
It’s Hard to See All Those Things Again." News18, 22 Mar. 2019, https://www.news18.com/news/movies/nirbhayas-father-on-netflixs-delhi-crime-dontwant-to-watch-it-because-its-hard-to-see-all-those-things-again-2083627.html.
4. M&J Service. "Social Media and India's Judiciary: An Evolving Relationship." M&J
Service, https://mandjservice.com/blogs/blog/social-media-and-indias-judiciary-anevolving-relationship.
5. Law Journals. "Social Media and India's Judiciary: An Evolving Relationship."
International Journal of Law, vol. 9, no. 4, 2023, https://www.lawjournals.org/assets/archives/2023/vol9issue4/9136- 1693296010183.pdf.
6. Social Media and the Legal System: The Good, Bad, and Ugly." Suo Law,
https://www.suolaw.com/social-media-and-the-legal-system-the-good-bad-and-ugly/.
7. Manupatra. "Media Trials: Misuse of Freedom of Speech and Deterrent in the Path of
Justice." Manupatra, https://articles.manupatra.com/article-details/Media-Trials- Misuse-of-Freedom-of-Speech-and-Deterrent-in-the-path-of-Justice.