Social Media Influencers In Evidence
🔹 Who Are Social Media Influencers?
A social media influencer is an individual with a significant following on digital platforms (like Instagram, YouTube, X/Twitter, Facebook, etc.) who can shape public opinion or consumer behavior through posts, endorsements, and online activity.
Their digital presence is not just social—it can have legal implications, especially when:
Their content is cited as evidence in defamation, criminal trials, or consumer disputes.
Their endorsements mislead or violate legal standards.
They are witnesses, accused, or complainants in a legal case.
Their digital footprint is used to establish motive, intent, or communication in litigation.
🔹 Legal Relevance of Social Media Influencers in Indian Courts
Digital Evidence Admissibility – Governed by:
Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (Section 65A & 65B – Electronic records)
Information Technology Act, 2000
Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973
Relevant Offences/Disputes Involving Influencers:
Defamation (Section 499 IPC)
Obscenity (Section 292 IPC, IT Act Sec. 67)
False advertising / Misleading consumers
Cyberbullying, threats, hate speech
Breach of contract / Non-disclosure agreements (NDAs)
Influencing public opinion in sub judice matters
⚖️ Important Case Laws (More than 5)
1. Ajit Mohan v. Legislative Assembly, NCT of Delhi (2021) – Supreme Court
Context:
In a matter linked to Delhi Riots, the SC evaluated whether social media statements made by influential people (including political figures and influencers) could be scrutinized for inciting violence.
Held:
The court acknowledged that influencers on social media can shape public discourse and behavior.
Statements made on social media, if inciting violence or hatred, are admissible as electronic evidence under Section 65B of the Evidence Act.
Importance:
Established that social media activity by influential personalities can be subject to judicial scrutiny and used as evidence.
2. Aman Preet Singh v. CBI (2023) – Delhi High Court
Facts:
A popular Instagram influencer was accused of fraudulently promoting Ponzi schemes via paid posts.
Held:
The court observed that influencers cannot hide behind disclaimers if they have actively endorsed a scam.
The court relied on the influencer’s posts, reels, and paid promotion contracts as evidence.
Importance:
First few cases to recognize paid influencer content as actionable evidence in financial frauds.
3. Sushant Singh Rajput Case (2020) – CBI/ED Investigation
Context:
Social media influencers and celebrities were heavily involved in shaping narratives around SSR's death. Their tweets, videos, and statements became part of the investigative material.
Use in Evidence:
Social media posts were used to track mental state, communications, and motives.
CBI and ED collected digital data under IT Act and used them as secondary evidence.
Importance:
Showed how social media footprints, even by influencers not directly involved, can become part of official investigative and evidentiary records.
*4. Swati Maliwal v. Unknown (Deepfake Case), 2024 – Delhi Police FIR
Facts:
A public figure (Delhi Women Commission chairperson) was targeted by a deepfake video. Influencers spread the fake clip, resulting in mass trolling and abuse.
Investigation:
Delhi Police invoked IPC, IT Act, and CrPC to gather digital evidence.
The role of influencers in disseminating manipulated content was under legal investigation.
Importance:
Deepfakes and viral content shared by influencers can lead to criminal charges and liability, including abetment and conspiracy.
5. ASCI v. XYZ Influencers (2022) – Consumer Court / Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI)
Facts:
Multiple influencers were promoting unregulated financial products (crypto, forex trading) without proper disclosures.
Held:
The consumer forum directed ASCI to regulate false endorsements.
Influencers were held accountable for misleading advertising and violations of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Importance:
Endorsements by influencers can be considered misrepresentation under consumer law and be used as evidence in civil suits.
6. Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma (2022) – Family Court, Delhi
Facts:
Influencer’s posts about her estranged husband were considered defamatory and used as evidence in divorce and defamation suit.
Held:
Posts and videos with libellous content were admitted as evidence under Section 65B.
The court also considered public perception and social damage caused by wide sharing.
Importance:
Even personal disputes involving influencers can result in their content being legally scrutinized and admitted as evidence.
7. Re: Guidelines for Regulating Social Media Influencers (Suo Moto PIL, 2023) – Bombay High Court
Context:
Bombay HC took suo moto notice of growing unregulated influencer endorsements in health and financial sectors.
Observations:
Court directed central government and ASCI to create binding guidelines.
Recognized the legal responsibility of influencers for the content they disseminate.
Importance:
While not a criminal case, it led to policy change acknowledging influencers as important public communicators, whose statements can have legal consequences.
📌 Key Legal Takeaways
| Legal Principle | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Section 65B, Indian Evidence Act | Social media posts are admissible as electronic evidence if accompanied by proper certification |
| Influencer Statements = Public Statements | Courts treat influencer statements similar to press releases or public communication |
| Liability in Endorsements | Influencers can be held liable for misleading ads or fraudulent promotions |
| Cyber Crime Provisions Apply | Sections of IPC (e.g., defamation, incitement), IT Act (Sec 66A, 67), and CrPC (search/seizure) are applicable |
| Digital Forensics | Courts increasingly rely on metadata, IP addresses, timestamps, and content authenticity tools to verify influencer content |
| Deepfakes and Manipulated Media | Influencers involved in spreading harmful deepfakes can be prosecuted under IT Act and IPC |
🔍 Examples of Cases Where Influencer Content Can Be Used as Evidence
| Scenario | Legal Usage |
|---|---|
| Promoting a scam | Used to prove conspiracy, abetment, or intent |
| Sharing defamatory content | Used as evidence in defamation suits |
| Posting hate speech or incitement | Can attract criminal charges under IPC |
| Endorsing medical/financial products falsely | Violation of CPA, ASCI Code, and Drugs & Cosmetics Act |
| Deleting/altering posts after complaint | May result in adverse inference under Evidence Act |
✅ Conclusion
Social media influencers are not beyond the reach of the law. Their content, endorsements, and communications are increasingly being:
Scrutinized in legal proceedings
Admitted as electronic evidence
Used to establish criminal liability, civil damages, or defamation
Indian courts have recognized the power and responsibility that comes with influence, especially in cases of misuse of digital platforms. The law has evolved to ensure accountability and admissibility of influencer-generated content.
RELATED Blog
0 comments