Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Checking relevance for Swapnil Tripathi VS Supreme Court of India...
Swapnil Tripathi VS Supreme Court of India - 2018 0 Supreme(SC) 945 : The concept of live streaming of court proceedings in the Indian judiciary was introduced through a petition filed by public-spirited individuals seeking a declaration that Supreme Court proceedings of constitutional importance having an impact on the public at large should be live streamed. The Supreme Court, in its judgment, accepted the recommendations of the Attorney General of India and directed the framing of model guidelines for live streaming. This marked the formal institutional adoption of the concept in the Indian judiciary, with the Court emphasizing that live streaming is an extension of the principle of open courts and is technologically feasible. The Court also suggested a pilot project to begin with, indicating that the concept was being implemented for the first time in the Indian judicial system through this specific judgment.Checking relevance for Court on its Own Motion VS Ravjot Singh...
Court on its Own Motion VS Ravjot Singh - 2023 0 Supreme(P&H) 1848 : The concept of livestreaming court proceedings in the Indian judiciary originated from the principle of open justice, which holds that courts are ordinarily open to the public. This principle was affirmed by the Hon''''ble Supreme Court of India in Swapnil Tripathi v. Supreme Court of India, where it observed that virtual access to live court proceedings through technology would effectuate the right of access to justice, open justice, and public trial. The Court recognized that live streaming could extend access beyond the physical courtroom, especially due to logistical and infrastructural limitations, thereby enabling real-time access for litigants and the public. Subsequently, the Supreme Court framed ''''Comprehensive Guidelines for Live Streaming of Court Proceedings'''' and ''''Model Rules for Live Streaming and Recording of Court Proceedings'''' under Article 145(1) of the Constitution, establishing a structured and phased approach with safeguards, including exclusive copyright over recordings and prohibitions on unauthorized recording or dissemination.Checking relevance for K. Kiran Kumar, S/o Shri K. Dharmarao VS Swaroopa W/o Kiran Kumar...
K. Kiran Kumar, S/o Shri K. Dharmarao VS Swaroopa W/o Kiran Kumar - 2024 0 Supreme(Chh) 274 : The concept of live streaming of court proceedings in the Indian judiciary was introduced and considered by the Supreme Court of India in the case of Swapnil Tripathi v Supreme Court of India (through Secretary General), (2018) 10 SCC 639. The Court examined the practice in other countries such as Australia, Canada, China, England, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), Germany, the International Criminal Court (ICC), Ireland, Israel, New Zealand, Scotland, South Africa, and the United States of America, and subsequently issued guidelines for live streaming in India. The Court recognized the feasibility of live streaming due to technological advancements and emphasized its potential to enhance transparency, good governance, accountability, and public access to justice, particularly in cases of constitutional and national importance.Checking relevance for Vysakh K. G. , S/o. Gokuldas VS Union Of India...
Vysakh K. G. , S/o. Gokuldas VS Union Of India - 2022 0 Supreme(Ker) 950 : The concept of livestreaming of court proceedings in the Indian judiciary was first explicitly discussed and endorsed by the Supreme Court of India in the case of Swapnil Tripathi v. Supreme Court of India [(2018) 10 SCC 639]. In this judgment, the Apex Court elaborated on the principles of open justice, judicial accountability, and transparency, and held that live-streaming of proceedings is crucial for the dissemination of knowledge about judicial proceedings and for granting full access to justice to litigants. The Court emphasized that access to justice cannot be complete without the litigant being able to see, hear, and understand the course of proceedings firsthand. The judgment also linked the concept to broader constitutional values under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to freedom of speech and expression, and recognized the public''''s right to receive information as a facet of this right. Additionally, the Court referenced constitutional provisions such as Article 145(4) of the Constitution, Section 153-B of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, and Section 327 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, as supporting the framework for live-streaming. Therefore, the concept evolved through judicial interpretation and constitutional jurisprudence, particularly through the landmark judgment in Swapnil Tripathi.Checking relevance for Seemant Kumar Singh VS Mahesh PS...
Checking relevance for State of Kerala, Represented By the Deputy Superintendent of Police VS Nowfal...
State of Kerala, Represented By the Deputy Superintendent of Police VS Nowfal - 2022 0 Supreme(Ker) 75 : The concept of livestreaming court proceedings in the Indian judiciary was first formally recognized and upheld by the Supreme Court of India in the case of Swapnil Tripathi v. Supreme Court of India [2018 (4) KLT Online 2046 (SC)]. In this judgment, the Apex Court held that live streaming of court proceedings is part of the access to justice under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, emphasizing that the use of technology serves to virtually expand the court beyond the four walls of the courtroom. This landmark decision established the constitutional and procedural basis for livestreaming, marking the formal inception of the concept within the Indian judicial system.
