The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a writ petition seeking access to archived audio-visual recordings of court proceedings, holding that the applicable rules do not confer an automatic right to obtain such recordings unless the Court specifically directs their release. Justice C.M. Poonacha passed the order on September 21, 2026.
The Court examined the Karnataka Rules on Live Streaming and Recording of Court Proceedings, 2021, particularly the provisions governing access to archived recordings and their status as official court records.
Background
A. Sathyanarayana Swamy approached the High Court after his application seeking archived recordings relating to Writ Appeal No. 929 of 2025 was rejected by the Court's designated officer. The rejection communication dated July 23, 2026, relied on Rule 10(1)(ii), which states that archived data does not constitute the official record of court proceedings unless otherwise directed by the Bench.
The petitioner challenged the rejection, relying on Rule 8(3), which provides for applications to obtain copies of recordings through the prescribed Form III.
Justice Poonacha considered Rules 8 and 10 together. Rule 8(3) allows applications for recordings that have not been uploaded, while Rule 10(1)(ii) clarifies that archived data is not the official court record unless the Bench directs otherwise.
The Court observed:
"It is clear from combined reading of Rule 8 and Rule 10 of the Rules, that the same do not in any manner provide a right to the petitioner to seek for copies of the said recording unless the same is specifically ordered by the Court."
The rules also restrict unauthorised recording, sharing and publication of archived data. Rule 10(2)(iv) states:
"The use of authorised recordings in their original form may be permitted by the Court, inter-alia to disseminate news and for training, academic and educational purposes."
The Court found that the provisions did not establish an independent right to obtain the requested recordings without a specific judicial direction.
Justice C.M. Poonacha dismissed the writ petition, holding that the petitioner had no vested right under the cited rules to demand copies of the archived recordings in the absence of a specific order from the Court.
Case Details
- Case Title: A. Sathyanarayana Swamy v. High Court of Karnataka & Others
- Case Number: Writ Petition No. 28070 of 2026 (GM-RES)
- Judge: Justice C.M. Poonacha
- Decision Date: September 21, 2026
