Section 32 Arbitration Act | Termination for Non-Payment of Fees Ends Arbitrator’s Mandate; Remedy Lies in Section 14(2): Supreme Court False Allegations of Dowry and Bigamy Amount to Mental Cruelty: Madras High Court Upholds Divorce Plaintiff Must Prove Her Own Title Before Seeking Demolition Of Defendant’s Pre-existing House: Andhra Pradesh High Court Mismatch Between Bullet and Recovered Gun Fatal to Prosecution: Calcutta High Court Acquits Man Convicted for Murder Where the Conduct of the Sole Eye-Witness Appears Unnatural and No Independent Witness Is Examined, Conviction Cannot Stand: Allahabad High Court Fraudulent Sale of Vehicle During Hire Purchase Renders Agreement Void: Gauhati High Court Upholds Decree for Refund of ₹4.90 Lakhs Unsigned Written Statement Can’t Silence a Defendant: Hyper-Technical Objections Must Yield to Substantive Justice: Delhi High Court Default Bail | No Accused, No Extension: Delhi High Court Rules Custody Extension Without Notice as Gross Illegality Under Article 21 Gratuity Can Be Withheld Post-Retirement for Proven Negligence Under Service Rules – Payment of Gratuity Act Does Not Override CDA Rules: Calcutta High Court Cognizance Is of the Offence, Not the Offender: Madras High Court Rejects Challenge to ED’s Supplementary Complaint in PMLA Case Acquittal in Rajasthan No Bar to Trial in Madhya Pradesh: MP High Court Rejects Double Jeopardy Plea in Antiquities Theft Case 20% Deposit Isn’t Automatic in Cheque Bounce Appeals: Right to Appeal Can’t Be Priced Out: Punjab & Haryana High Court Checks Mechanical Use of Section 148 NI Act A Child Is Not a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets New Benchmark in Compensation for Minors’ Deaths 90 Days Is Not Sacrosanct – Courts Can Permit Reply to Counter-Claim Even Beyond Prescribed Time in Interest of Justice: Punjab & Haryana High Court Magistrate Can Proceed Only for Offences Committed in India Until Sanction Is Obtained for Acts Outside India: Orissa High Court on International Financial Fraud Award Is Vitiated by Non-Consideration of Material Evidence: Orissa High Court Sets Aside Industrial Tribunal’s Wage Award in IMFA Case POCSO | Absence of Child's Name in Birth Certificate Not Fatal: Kerala High Court No One Has the Right to Impute Illicit Motives to Judges in the Name of Free Speech: Karnataka High Court Jails Man for Criminal Contempt DV Complaint Cannot Be Quashed at Threshold Under Article 227: Madras High Court Refuses to Interfere, Directs Accused to Seek Remedy Before Magistrate Recovery Wasn't From Accused's Exclusive Knowledge — Cylinder Already Marked in Site Plan Before Arrest: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man in Murder Case State Can’t Block SARFAESI Sale by Late Revenue Entries: Secured Creditor’s Charge Prevails Over Tax Dues: Punjab & Haryana High Court Slams Sub-Registrar’s Refusal Providing SIM Card Without Knowledge of Its Criminal Use Does Not Imply Criminal Conspiracy: P&H High Court Grants Bail in UAPA & Murder Case Importer Who Accepts Enhanced Valuation Cannot Later Contest Confiscation and Penalty for Undervaluation: Madras High Court Upholds Strict Liability under Customs Act "Allegations Are Not Proof: Madras High Court Refuses Divorce Without Substantiated Cruelty or Desertion" When FIR Is Filed After Consulting Political Leaders, the Possibility of Coloured Version Cannot Be Ruled Out: Kerala High Court Mere Allegations of Antecedents Without Conviction Can't Defeat Right to Anticipatory Bail: Kerala High Court Section 106 Of Evidence Act Cannot Be Invoked In Vacuum – Prosecution Must First Lay Foundational Facts: Karnataka High Court Acquits Wife And Co-Accused In Husband’s Murder Case Parity Cannot Be Claimed When Roles Are Different: Karnataka High Court Refuses Bail to Youth Accused of Brutal Killing Injured Wife Would Not Falsely Implicate Her Husband: Gauhati High Court Upholds Conviction in Domestic Stabbing Case Disputed Bids, Missing Evidence and No Prejudice: Delhi High Court Refuses to Intervene in Tender Challenge under Article 226 Setting Fire to House Where Only Minors Were Present is a Heinous Offence – No Quashing Merely Because Parties Settled: Calcutta High Court No Exclusive Possession Means Licence, Not Lease: Calcutta High Court Rules City Civil Court Has Jurisdiction to Evict Licensees Defendant's Own Family Attested the Sale Agreement – Yet She Called It Nominal: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Specific Performance Renewal Not Automatic, No Evidence Of Notice Or Mutual Agreement: AP High Court Dismisses Indian Oil’s Appeal Against Eviction

Delhi High Court Orders Immediate Removal of Unauthorized Court Recordings, Citing Violation of Video Conferencing Rules

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Unauthorized audio/video recordings involving Delhi CM Kejriwal must be removed from social media platforms, orders the Court.

In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has directed social media platforms to remove unauthorized audio and video recordings of court proceedings involving Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal. The bench, comprising Justices Neena Bansal Krishna and Amit Sharma, highlighted the violation of the Delhi High Court Video Conferencing Rules, 2021, and emphasized the need to prevent the re-uploading of such content until further orders.

The court noted a prima facie violation of Rule 3(vi) of the Delhi High Court Video Conferencing Rules, 2021. The rule explicitly prohibits the unauthorized recording and dissemination of court proceedings. “The court proceeding recording is violative of Rule 3(vi) of Delhi High Court Video Conferencing Rules, 2021, and cannot be permitted to remain in the public domain,” observed the bench.

The court directed major social media platforms, including X (formerly Twitter), Meta (formerly Facebook), Instagram, and YouTube, to remove the identified recordings immediately. The specific URLs listed in the court order must be taken down, and measures should be implemented to prevent the re-uploading of these recordings until further orders.

The petitioner, advocate Vaibhav Singh, argued that the unauthorized recordings were part of a conspiracy to malign the judiciary and mislead the public. Singh contended that the recordings, which involved a detailed account by CM Kejriwal during his production in court in connection with the Delhi Liquor Policy scam, were deliberately circulated on social media to manipulate public perception.

The court granted interim relief to the petitioner, ordering the removal of specific URLs and directing social media platforms to ensure the recordings are not re-uploaded. “The Social Media platforms namely X (formerly Twitter), Meta (formerly Facebook), Instagram, and YouTube are hereby directed to remove forthwith the audio/video recording from their respective platforms,” the court directed.

Notice of the petition has been issued to the remaining respondents, with instructions for service through ordinary post and electronic mode. The case has been listed for further hearing before the Roster Bench on July 9, 2024.

The court underscored the importance of adhering to established rules governing the conduct of virtual court proceedings. Unauthorized recordings not only violate these rules but also compromise the integrity of the judicial process. By enforcing strict compliance with the Delhi High Court Video Conferencing Rules, the court aims to uphold the sanctity of judicial proceedings.

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna remarked, “The unauthorized recording and dissemination of court proceedings are a direct violation of the established rules and undermine the integrity of our judicial process.”

The Delhi High Court’s decision to remove unauthorized court recordings sets a precedent for maintaining the confidentiality and integrity of judicial proceedings in the digital age. This ruling reinforces the importance of adhering to video conferencing rules and serves as a warning against attempts to manipulate public perception through unauthorized means. The court’s directives are expected to have a lasting impact on how court proceedings are conducted and disseminated in the future.

Date of Decision: June 15, 2024

Vaibhav Singh vs. Sunita Kejriwal & Ors.

 

Latest Legal News