The Bombay High Court has clarified that live streaming of its court proceedings will require the consent of the presiding judge, according to a notification issued on November 10, 2025. This announcement comes amid a public interest litigation (PIL) challenging a seven-year-old decision by the Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission (MERC), which banned the audio and video recording of its hearings.
The notice, signed by Nitin V. Jiwane, Officer on Special Duty, details that under the Bombay High Court Rules for Live Streaming and Recording of Court Proceedings, 2025, judges have the authority to approve access to streamed recordings. “The Hon’ble Judge(s) of the concerned Court are designated as the Designated Officer(s) under Rule 7.3, who are only empowered to sanction access to copies of Live Streamed Recordings upon receipt of an application in the Form prescribed under Schedule III of the Rules,” the notification states.
Moreover, the court indicated that the storage and preservation of live-streamed recordings would only occur under specific court directives, typically for six months or another duration deemed suitable. “The storage and preservation of Live Streamed Recordings shall be undertaken only upon specific directions of the concerned Hon’ble Court in accordance with Rule 7.4,” the notice read.
This clarification coincided with Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai raising concerns about a manipulated video circulated on social media that falsely depicted an incident involving a shoe being thrown in his courtroom. The Bombay High Court began live streaming select bench proceedings in July this year to enhance transparency and improve public access, while some benches have opted not to participate. This initiative stands in contrast to the Supreme Court, which has streamed all its proceedings since 2023.
The MERC’s resolution dated September 4, 2018, effectively prohibits audio and video recordings of its hearings, denies public access to past recordings, and mandates the destruction of existing recordings on the grounds that they are “not part of official record.” This restrictive stance has prompted a PIL filed by Kamlakar Shenoy, a Mumbai-based businessman and consumer activist. He alleges that MERC’s resolution breaches Section 86(3) of the Electricity Act, 2003, which mandates transparency in regulatory functions, and violates the MERC’s own Conduct of Business Regulations, 2004. These regulations require MERC to maintain an indexed database of its records and to make information of public interest available.
The petition also refers to the Maharashtra Public Records Act, 2005, and highlights recent observations by the Supreme Court regarding the importance of live streaming court proceedings. Shenoy’s PIL contends that MERC’s actions are contrary to the national trend toward greater openness. “The resolution is ex-facie illegal as it overrides statutory regulations and established practices of transparency,” the PIL states, calling for the rescinding of the ban and restoration of public access to recordings.
The ongoing legal battle underscores critical issues of transparency and public access in regulatory proceedings, reflecting a broader societal demand for accountability in government functions. The outcome of this PIL could have significant implications for the regulatory landscape in Maharashtra and beyond.
Original Source: https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/mumbai/live-streaming-only-with-judges-nod-says-bombay-hc/article70267745.ece
Category : Mumbai
Tags:
Publish Date: 2025-11-12 09:23:00
