1. A person was found recording court proceedings using a communication device inside the courtroom without authorization, violating specific High Court rules governing live-streaming and recording. (Para 1 )
Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 5628
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CNR No : HCBM010013742024
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.811 OF 2024
Nagendra Lalchand Kanojiya ...Petitioner vs.The Chief Executive Officer, Slum Rehabilitation Authority & Ors. ...Respondents
AND
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (L)NO.11955 OF 2026
Omprakash Ramdhani Kanaujia ...Petitioner vs.The Chief Executive Officer, Slum Rehabilitation Authority & Ors. ...Respondents
AND
WRIT PETITION NO.2966 OF 2024
Mallesh Malhari Kalluri. ...Petitioner vs.The Chief Executive Officer, Slum Rehabilitation Authority & Ors. ...Respondents
AND
WRIT PETITION (L) NO.20854 OF 2026
Ajay Nathuram Kanojia ...Petitioner vs.The Chief Executive Officer, Slum Rehabilitation Authority & Ors. ...Respondents
Mr. Amogh Singh a/w Mr. Janay Jain, Mr. Ashwin Tripathi for Petitioner in WP/811/2024 and WPL/20854/2026.
Mr Vijay Jethmaliya present.
Mr A H Laddhad, Prothonotary & Senior Master, present.
CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI & DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ.
DATE: 19 OCTOBER 2026
(DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.) (G. S. KULKARNI, J.)
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. The person involved, acting on instructions, admitted to the unauthorized recording of court proceedings while asserting their presence as a legal clerk. (Para 1 , 4 )
3. Unauthorized recording of judicial proceedings undermines the sanctity of the court, interferes with the administration of justice, and constitutes a serious violation of established courtroom rules and discipline. (Para 2 , 3 )
4. Unauthorized video or audio recording of court proceedings is prohibited under established Court Rules and constitutes a contemptuous act that warrants seizure of equipment and punitive measures. (Para 2 , 3 )
5. The court directed the confiscation and data erasure of the recording device, imposed monetary fines, and mandated formal undertakings against further such violations. (Para 5 )
6. Does unauthorized recording of court proceedings constitute contempt of court?
Yes, unauthorized recording of court proceedings without prior permission is a serious interference with the administration of justice and is considered contemptuous conduct that invites prosecution and punitive action. (Para 2 , 3 )
7. What authority does the court have to address the use of recording devices within the courtroom?
The court has explicit authority under its internal High Court Rules to prohibit recording, seize unauthorized devices, order the permanent deletion of data, and impose monetary penalties or initiate contempt proceedings against violators. (Para 2 , 3 , 5 )
8. Are lawyers and their staff exempt from rules prohibiting the recording of court proceedings?
No, all persons attending court, including members of the bar and their staff, are strictly bound by the rules regarding courtroom etiquette and the express prohibition of unauthorized recording of proceedings. (Para 2 , 4 )
P.C.
1. The Court assembled today at 10.00 am to continue the hearing of part- heard proceedings in this batch of Petitions. When the Court was in session, the learned Prothonotary & Senior Master, Bombay High Court, who was passing from the Court corridor, noticed that one person was recording the Court proceedings. The Prothonotary & Senior Master immediately entered the Court-room so as to bring this fact to the notice of the Court. The person identified is one Mr Vijay Jethmaliya who states that he is the Clerk of Mr. Amogh Singh, Advocate, who has stated that he was recording the Court proceedings under the instructions of one Mr Rutuparn Deo, Advocate who is a junior of Mr Amogh Singh. The recording of the Court proceedings was without any approval being obtained in a manner the law would mandate hence, illegally.
2. We are really surprised. The Advocates of this Court are the first persons who are required to adhere to the rules of the Court. We may state that there is an express bar to record Court proceedings under the Rules framed by the High Court. We may refer to the Rules governing Live-Streaming and Recording of Court Proceedings. The bar applies to both live streaming and otherwise. The relevant provisions are 9.2 and 9.3, which read thus:
“9. Disclaimers, Prohibitions and Restrictions :-
9.1. Disclaimers * * *
9.2. Prohibitions and restrictions on usage of the recording or live stream :-
i. No person/entity (including print and electronic media, and social media platforms) other than an authorised person/entity shall record, share and/or disseminate live streamed proceedings or archival data.This provision shall also apply to all messaging applications. Any person/entity acting contrary to this provision will be prosecuted as per law. The court shall have the exclusive copyright in the recordings and archival Data. Any unauthorised usage of the live stream will be punishable as an offence under the Indian Copyright Act, 1957, Information Technology Act, 2000, and other provisions of law, including the law of Contempt.
ii. Any party/ litigant-in-person accessing the live stream will be bound by these Rules.
iii. The live stream shall not, without the prior written authorisation of the Court, be reproduced, transmitted, uploaded, posted, modified, published, or re-published in any form.
iv. The use of authorised recordings in their original form may be permitted by the court, inter-alia to disseminate news and for training, academic and educational purposes. Authorised recordings handed over for the aforesaid purposes shall not be further edited or processed. Such recordings will not be used for commercial, promotional purposes or advertising in any form.
v. No person shall use a recording device for recording or for transcribing the proceedings, other than those authorised by the Court.
9.3. Use of communication device or recording device during proceedings :-
i. A person must not use a communication device or a recording device to disturb proceedings in a manner that may cause concern to a witness or other participants in the proceedings or allow a person who is not a participant to receive information about the proceeding or the hearing to which the person is not otherwise entitled.”
ii. During proceedings, all personnel shall follow the instructions of the presiding judge, adhere to courtroom etiquettes and discipline, and shall not engage in the following actions- audio and/or video recording, taking screenshots or using mobile communication tools to relay the proceedings.
iii. Violation of Sub-Rules (i) and (ii) will result in prosecution as per law. Additionally, the bench may also direct seizure of the communication device or recording device.”
(emphasis supplied)3. Recently, a similar incident had happened in the case of High Court on its Own Motion v. Shri Vilas Shamrao Wagh1Suo Motu High Court on its Own Motion (St) No. 29396 of 2026 when the Court considering the posit
