Unauthorized Video Recording Of Court Proceedings Without Prior Permission Amounts To Contempt Of Court: Bombay High Court

"No person, whether he is a member of the Press or otherwise or any other member of the public, is entitled to take photograph of the proceedings of the Court including subordinate Courts without the permission of the High Court, and if such person resorts to such actions, violating the above procedure, the act will amount to Contempt of Court." Bombay High Court, in a suo motu proceeding dated 5th October 2026, has firmly ruled that unauthorized audio or video recording of court proceedings is strictly prohibited and constitutes an act of contempt.

A division bench comprising Justices G.S. Kulkarni and Dr. Neela Gokhale observed that such actions interfere with the administration of justice and violate the specific rules governing the live-streaming and recording of court proceedings.

Strict Prohibition Under Court Rules

The court underscored that, barring authorized entities, there is an express bar on recording, sharing, or disseminating court proceedings under the High Court’s Rules on Live-Streaming and Recording. The bench highlighted that Rule 9.2 and Rule 9.3 of these regulations specifically prohibit the use of recording or communication devices to capture or relay proceedings without prior written permission. Any violation of these provisions, the court noted, is punishable under the Indian Copyright Act, 1957, the Information Technology Act, 2000, and the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

Court Proceedings Are Public But Not For Unauthorized Recording

While acknowledging that courtrooms are open to the public, the bench clarified that this openness does not grant a license to disregard courtroom etiquette or statutory restrictions. The court observed that, while it welcomes public attendance, the sanctity and solemnity of the judicial process must be maintained. The unauthorized recording of proceedings, especially when done surreptitiously, is a direct challenge to the decorum and discipline of the institution.

Court Acts Against Unauthorized Videography

The issue arose when a government employee, Dilip Wagh, was caught red-handed recording court proceedings on his mobile phone. Despite his attempt to delete the recording, IT department experts successfully recovered the footage. The court noted that Wagh’s attempt to delete the file demonstrated his awareness that his actions were impermissible. The bench emphasized that such conduct is particularly serious when committed by an individual employed in government service.

Precedents On Contemptuous Conduct

In arriving at its decision, the court relied upon several precedents, including rulings from the Punjab and Haryana High Court and the Rajasthan High Court. These judgments consistently established that the unauthorized recording of court proceedings is not merely a violation of administrative rules but is a serious interference with the administration of justice. Courts have previously held that such acts of videography are contemptuous in nature, as they undermine the authority of the judiciary.

Finding the act to be a clear violation of the law, the court ordered the confiscation and destruction of the respondent's mobile handset following the removal of personal data. Additionally, the respondent was directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 10,000 with the High Court Legal Services Authority, failing which the amount would be recovered from his salary as arrears of land revenue. The court cautioned that any future recurrence of such behavior would be met with stringent contempt proceedings.

Date of Decision: 05 October 2026