Bombay High Court Seizes Man's Phone For Recording Court Proceedings, Imposes ₹10,000 Costs

Observing that instances of litigants recording Court proceedings and misusing the same are on the rise, the Bombay High Court on Monday (October 5) ordered confiscation of a man's mobile handset for video recording the proceedings and also imposed cost of Rs 10,000 for such act.

A division bench of Justice Girish Kulkarni and Justice Dr Neela Gokhale while conducting proceedings in their court hall, noted that one man, later identified as Dilip Wagh, was video recording the proceedings as the flashlight of his handset was on.

Wagh, who was sitting in the last row, informed the judges that he worked in the office of the Education Inspector. He initially said he did not record the proceedings, however, when the bench called officials from the IT Department of the High Court, the video was retrieved from the "recently deleted" folder.

Irked over his conduct, the bench observed:

"Unfortunately, such instances are on the rise, when persons by different measures without prior permission record Court proceedings. These recordings are then manipulated in ways unimaginable and then distorted versions are posted on social media. In fact, it has become quite rampant. In the present case, the concerned person - Wagh, was sitting inside the courtroom in the absence of any case concerning him, being taken up by the Court."

The judges clarified that there cannot be any objection for any member of the public to attend the Court and witness the Court proceedings, as they are open proceedings. However, certainly, restrictions on any member of the public to adhere to the rules and regulations governing the Court proceedings, when inside the Courtroom, need to be followed in letter and spirit, the judges said.

"This is the least, that can be expected from any person witnessing the Court proceedings. It is stated that Wagh is working with a government department, and if that be so, the responsibility on him, not to indulge into such actions, was more onerous. We are persuaded to believe from his demeanor that he was fully aware of these basic expectations when inside the courtroom and that too when the Court was in session. We are not aware as to what was his motive/intention in indulging into such acts, as no reason is forthcoming much less acceptable," the bench said.

Wagh's conduct of deleting the video when caught by the court, the judges said, indicated that he was fully aware of not recording the proceedings. "Thus, considering the seriousness, casualness and frequency of such instances happening, it is high time that actions as the law would mandate are taken by the Court. We may hasten to add that on many occasions the Court may not even be aware of any such recording taking place, and only when clips of such video recording start circulating in the social media, such unauthorised actions would get noticed for actions to be taken, if the content is in any manner objectionable. We are of the firm view, that things need to be prevented from reaching such stage," the judges underscored.

The judges said that the doors of the Court are open to one and all; to lawyers whose cases are listed or not; to junior lawyers; to students who are eager to attend the Court proceedings to learn and get enriched from their Court experience; to the litigants who are concerned with their Court proceedings or to the Press.

"However, there cannot be any doubt that all such persons attending Court proceedings need to abide by the basic norms and conduct themselves responsibly so as to maintain the elementary etiquette and adherence to the relevant Rules in attending the Court proceedings and respecting its solemnity and sanctity, which they do normally. In fact, we welcome and would be least perturbed in the Court proceedings being witnessed by one and all. What is however, disturbing is the act of such person simply attending the proceedings and video recording the same for no rhyme or reason. We also cannot imagine, and do not know the motives in doing so. We need not know," the bench observed.

In the present case, the judges remarked that Wagh has indulged in such action, as if he was sitting in a garden or on the roadside, or any other place alike, when recording of Court proceedings without permission was strictly prohibited as per the Live-Streaming and Recording of Court Proceedings Rules."We are thus of the considered view that we would be failing in our duty if we overlook the requirement of the Rules and the law, by not taking action as mandated by the Rules against Wagh. Such conduct also imminently warrants an action to be taken against him under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. However, considering the fact that he has tendered an apology, we accept the apology, albeit it cannot be unconditional, more particularly in view of Rule 9.2 read with Section 9.3 of the High Court Rules, being squarely attracted," the bench opined.

Accordingly the judges ordered confiscation of his mobile phone and ordered the IT authorities to remove his personal data from the handset and to record panchnama of the phone's seizure.

"Dilip Wagh is directed to deposit an amount of Rs.10,000 with the Secretary, High Court Legal Services Authority, Mumbai within a period of two weeks from today, failing which the same shall be recovered by the Head of Department from his salary as arrears of land revenue. It is made clear that any recurrence of such conduct by Wagh, or any further violation of the prohibition against recording Court proceedings, shall be viewed with utmost seriousness and shall invite appropriate proceedings in accordance with law, including proceedings for contempt of Court," the judges ordered. The matter has been placed further for recording compliance on October 19.