Breaking: Supreme Court Restrains Extraction & Circulation Of Court Proceedings Videos Without Prior Permission

The Supreme Court has barred any extraction, modification, dissemination, monetization, reposting, or uploading of judicial audio-video recordings on social media or digital platforms without the prior permission of the Secretary General of the Supreme Court or the Registrar General of the respective High Court.

The Court was hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking to restrain the unauthorized livestreaming and video circulation of court proceedings.

The Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana directed, "As an interim measure, it is directed that there shall be no extraction, modification, dissemination, or monetization of… Posting, reposting and uploading of the court proceedings on social media or other digital platforms without prior permission of…the Registrar of the concerned court or Secretary General of the concerned court."

Senior Advocate Vikas Singh appeared for the Petitioner, while Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appeared for the Union of India.

During the hearing, Senior Advocate Vikas Singh submitted that while he personally saw no issue with livestreaming, the unauthorized dissemination of short clips out of context had turned judicial proceedings into a mockery.

He submitted, "The problem is not only of, Lord, extracting, then adding words, showing in clips, showing in a derogatory manner—all that is happening now. So today, Lord, unfortunately, there is no application as such for your Lordships to also not pass an interim order on this. I'll get the application filed during the course of the day...only two things I want to show before your Lordships pass the order. There are model rules which your Lordships have drafted for this court. This has complete protection. But these model rules will not be sufficient as far as this petition is concerned. This is only for the Supreme Court. In these model rules, if your Lordships will see, 9.2, 9.2. This is since 2021."

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta backed the submissions and highlighted the grave risk posed by Artificial Intelligence tools, which could manipulate audio-video recordings to alter the statements of judges and counsel.

SG Mehta said, "Suppose, my Lord, your Lordships are saying something to me and I'm responding in a particular manner to your Lordships. My Lord, there are very easily accessible and available IT tools or AI tools where, my Lord, with the same lip movement, my words can be changed in my own voice and your Lordships' words can also be changed in your Lordships' voice. My Lord, if that happens, my Lord—it is happening in other spheres, other than legal spheres."

Justice Joymalya Bagchi remarked that regulating data remained a major challenge in the digital space and stressed that court proceedings could not be permitted to function like a "24/7 entertainment channel."

Taking note of the misuse, the bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant observed that media reporting had at times attributed statements to judges that were never made.

The court expressed strong displeasure over the trend of individuals attempting to gain social media celebrity status through court appearances and highlighted instances where matters were orally mentioned before the court prior to the actual filing of petitions.

Consequently, the Supreme Court issued notice in the matter and impleaded all High Courts, directing them to submit reports on the implementation of court-circulated guidelines and the impact of continuous livestreaming.

The bench further issued notice to social media intermediaries, including Meta and X, and directed the Union Government to submit a proposal through nodal ministries, alongside a list of relevant intermediaries prepared with the assistance of the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeiTY).

Passing a significant interim order to curb the misuse, the Supreme Court directed that there shall be no extraction, modification, dissemination, monetization, reposting, or uploading of audio-video recordings of judicial proceedings on any social media or digital platform without the prior permission of the Secretary General of the Supreme Court or the Registrar General of the respective High Court.

Cause Title: Harshita Grover v. Union of India & Ors. [W.P.(C) No. 751/2026]