Earlier in June, Tabassum Khan, a trial court judge in Madhya Pradesh was subjected to online abuse for convicting a group of cow vigilantes to life imprisonment for lynching truck driver Sheikh Lala Nazir Ahmed in August 2022. Khan’s religious identity took centerstage as an online mob issued rape and death threats.
In another incident, Justice Gautam Patel, who retired from the Bombay High Court in April 2024, and his family faced online threats after he delivered a verdict securing the succession line of the Dawoodi Bohra community. Justice Patel’s daughter, who lives in London, was physically assaulted and reportedly faced a house invasion attempt.
In early 2024, then-Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa faced online threats and protests after he delivered a verdict acquitting a man accused of blasphemy. The man was from the Ahmedi sect – considered to be a heretical by hardline Muslim scholars.
In an unprecedented move, earlier this year Sri Lankan Supreme Court judge AHMD Nawaz moved the Karnataka High Court in India seeking the takedown of defamatory content against him. Justice Nawaz said the articles, published between 2015-2020, essentially accused him of being corrupt even after he was acquitted of all charges.
The Sri Lankan judge said he decided to seek relief from Indian courts since it would be improper for a sitting judge to file the matter in Sri Lankan courts as “no man can be a judge in his own cause” and because there was no Google office in Sri Lanka.
These are just a handful of examples which demonstrate how the judiciary across South Asia is facing online mobs when their decision seems to go against the majoritarian sentiment.
“We are in a populist era where the judiciary is no longer considered sacrosanct, so people feel increasingly empowered to comment on legal issues online,” Professor Joyojeet Pal, who teaches user experience (UX) and client-based design at the School of Information, University of Michigan Ann Arbor, said.
In 2023, Pal, along with his colleague Sheyril Agarwal and Indian news portal Newslaundry, published a study focusing on the nature of trolling of former Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud.
They analysed data from X (formerly Twitter) between January 1 – April 20, 2023.
According to his study, the trolling was an organised campaign by digital influencers. They also found that the content shared by BJP-leaning influencers was a lot more dominant. The study highlighted that Chandrachud was presented as “anti-Hindu”, attacked for his father’s legacy, and his liberal views.
Pal added that when judges pass a judgement on a contentious matter, they are seen as “unelected elites superseding elected representatives’ position”.
Hypernationalism, Social Media, and Declining Trust in Judiciary
Studies and experts have underscored the correlation between the rise in hypernationalism and a declining trust in the judiciary. This lack of trust could be attributed to the judiciary’s alleged hesitation to confront executive excesses and judicial corruption.
Noted Bangladeshi scholar Dr. Kalam Shahed, who passed away in 2024, wrote in an article in 2021, “Systemic judicial corruption stifles the broader accountability function that the judiciary is constitutionally entrusted with. It remains, at best hesitant, or at worst, incapable of safeguarding the state’s essential democratic functions – upholding citizens’ rights, securing the integrity of the political rules of the game, and sanctioning of other branches when they act in contravention of law.”
Experts also point out that loyalty to the government is often conflated with loyalty to the nation and that creates a warped idea of nationalism. “Any disagreement with the executive is seen as disloyalty,” scholar and author Insiyah Vahnavaty said.
Niranjan Sahoo, senior fellow, Observer Research Foundation (ORF), a Delhi-based think tank, pointed out that social media has made such attacks even more common.
“While judges in many countries particularly in South Asia earlier faced verbal or physical intimidation/abuse/attacks on some occasions, with the arrival of digital/social media, this has gone up dramatically in recent years,” Sahoo said.
In 2024, hashtags such as #SupremeKotha, #MiyaLord (a derogatory communal form of My Lord), #Dogali_Nyay_Vyavastha among others were trending after the Indian Supreme Court granted bail to then Delhi Chief Minister and leader of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) Arvind Kejriwal in a corruption case.
Sahoo said that “Pakistan is notorious in this regard” and added, “lately judges, particularly in lower courts in India, have been subject to vicious online attacks where threats have been issued for rape and murder. This poses gravest threats to the independence of judiciary/judges.”
Earlier this year, Lahore High Court directed state authorities to probe those behind the social media campaign vilifying women high court judges. The court directive followed petitions seeking accountability after Lahore High Court Chief Justice Aalia Neelum — Lahore’s first female chief justice — faced online harassment after suspending certain provisions of the Punjab Protection of Ownership of Immovable Property Ordinance, 2025 in December 2025.
Similarly, Moyeedul Islam, a former senior trial court judge in Bangladesh told us that he saw the prevalence of a mob culture in August 2024 following the July uprising and the resignation of former Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina.
“During that period, even the courts were not spared from this. Although it has largely subsided now, its lingering impact remains in the minds of the judges.,” Islam said.
He spoke about how online attacks quickly turn violent and cause real-world harm.
Islam shared another instance from March 2020 where a district judge of Pirojpur rejected bail pleas of a former MP from the Awami League and his wife in a corruption case and remanded them to jail. Pro-party lawyers and activists vandalised the court premises, and even blockaded roads and set fires. “The authorities transferred the district judge elsewhere within three hours, yet no action was taken against the rioters,” the former judge said.
Speaking about the impact of such instances, Vahanvaty said, “These mobs may be encouraged by the political actors, or by powerful hypernationalist groups that know they are unlikely to face any consequences.” She added that if judges have to balance those risks with their safety and job then one can’t blame them for choosing caution.
State Inaction Leads to a Weak Judiciary
Courts across South Asia have also used contempt of court laws to protect the judiciary. However, critics say that the South Asian judiciary is “better known for its impulsive acts of invoking contempt actions”.
Drawing attention to State’s inaction to such instances due to political alignment, Vahanavaty said, “We have seen situations where the courts themselves have had to step in and provide protection when the State machinery has been slow to respond or has remained silent. That is welcome when it happens, but it should not be the norm. Protecting judges is not the Court’s responsibility; it is the State’s.”
In 2024, when Islamabad High Court derecognised the cricket bat as Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf’s (PTI) election symbol, political workers in a coordinated campaign targeted Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa and the other top judges. The judges were exposed to public ire as the State failed to proactively prevent and stop the online trolling and harassment. However, later a Joint Investigation Team (JIT) was formed to investigate the matter.
Pointing out the similarities across South Asia, psychologist Niral Bhatia said, “Social media can turn a judicial order into a community/religious/political/identity battle – ‘an us v/s them’.
Bhatia also spoke about the impact of such harassment and said this fear of trolling, doxxing and being “viral” online can also subconsciously prompt judges into ‘defensive adjudication’ and take an overtly cautious approach to law. “That’s why this is now becoming a systemic issue. No judge will change a judgement because of social media. But constant harassment can definitely create a kind of anxiety and fear,” she said.
The Blurring Lines Between Criticism and Harassment
Former Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, who has been massively trolled for his judgements on social media, said that certain actors on the internet can’t seem to tolerate other peoples’ right to free speech. The digital space has shrunk that space, he said.
Experts say that similar to other public institutions, the judiciary should be open to criticism but that criticism shouldn’t become harassment and at the same time no sweeping laws should be used to suppress legitimate dissent.
“We don’t want a system where criticism of judges is treated as a threat, because the judiciary, like any public institution, must be open to criticism. The safeguards have to be narrow, transparent and subject to judicial oversight. I would resist giving the government sweeping powers to decide what constitutes harmful speech. That can very easily become a tool for suppressing legitimate criticism or dissent. The line has to be drawn at threats, doxxing, incitement to violence and coordinated harassment designed to intimidate a judge from doing their job,” Vahanavaty said.
She added that it’s crucial to recognise that criticism is not the same as harassment.
“We need to be much better at making that distinction. Protect the judge from intimidation, but allow for criticism. That, I think, is the balance we need,” she added.