Bombay High Court Imposes ₹ 1 Lakh Fine On Litigant For Illegal Audio Recording Of Court Proceedings
Counsel confirmed that no permission had been granted for recording the proceedings and acknowledged that his actions were unjustifiable.
The Bombay High Court imposed a fine of Rs. 1 lakh on a litigant for illegally recording court proceedings on his mobile phone.
The incident occurred during the hearing of a writ petition involving a property dispute between two brothers.
The counsel confirmed that no permission had been granted for recording the proceedings and acknowledged that his actions were unjustifiable. However, he requested leniency, noting that this was his first such offense and asking the court not to take stringent action against him. "The concerned Court staff therefore confronted the said person. He informed the Court staff that, he is relative of Respondent Nos.3 & 4. Upon a query by the Court staff, they were informed that, he was not granted any permission by the Registry of this Court to do the said audio recording. Therefore as per the Notice dated February 13, 2017 issued by the Registry, his gadget i.e. mobile phone was seized, switched off and then forwarded to the Registry for safe custody," the order recorded.
A division bench of Justice Ajay Gadkari and Justice Kamal Khata said, "However, Mr Venegavkar requested this Court to show leniency to him as this is his first act and therefore may not to take stringent action against him. He thereafter on instructions from Sajid Abdul Jabbar Patel informed this Court that, for his said misconduct he (Patel) will pay a cost of Rs.1 lakh to the High Court Employees Medical Welfare Fund at Mumbai, within a period of three days from the date of uploading of the present Order on the official website of the High Court of Bombay. The said statement is accepted as an undertaking given to this Court."
Advocate Ajay S. Patil appeared for the petitioner and Advocate Hiten Venegavkar appeared for the Respondent.
The Court adjourned the hearing until March 5, 2025, to ensure compliance with the order.
Cause Title: Sameer Mohammad Yusuf Patel v. The Panvel Municipal Corporation & Ors.
Appearance:
Respondents: Advocates Meet Sawant, H.S. Venegavkar, Harsh Dedhia, Savina R. Crasto
