Logo

Kerala HC Bars Advocate From Virtual Proceedings Over Unauthorised Recording and Uploading of Court Hearings

Shivam Y.

Kerala High Court bars an advocate from virtual proceedings after noting unauthorised recording and uploading of court proceedings on YouTube and X. - Suo Motu Proceedings Initiated by the High Court v. Adv. Mathews J. Nedumpara

Advertisement
Kerala HC Bars Advocate From Virtual Proceedings Over Unauthorised Recording and Uploading of Court Hearings
Join Telegram

The Kerala High Court has taken serious note of the unauthorised recording and online publication of its court proceedings, directing that an advocate facing contempt proceedings shall not participate in any court proceedings in Kerala through online or virtual mode until further orders.

The order was passed by a Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V.M. on August 20, 2026.

Advertisement

Background of the Case

The proceedings arose after the Registry reported that court proceedings had allegedly been recorded and uploaded on a YouTube account despite earlier warnings. The High Court noted that such recording and uploading was contrary to Rule 3(9) of the Electronic Audio-Video Linkage Rules (Kerala), 2025.

The Rule requires confidentiality of proceedings and prohibits broadcasting, photographing, publishing, recording or sharing them without written permission.

The Court noted:

“The aforesaid provision expressly prohibits broadcasting, photographing, publishing, recording or sharing of proceedings conducted under the Rules, either wholly or in part, except with the written permission of the High Court, Court or Forum.”

The Bench also referred to an interim order of the Supreme Court dated July 24, 2026, which restricted the extraction, dissemination, uploading, transmission, modification, storing or hosting of audio-video recordings of judicial proceedings on digital platforms without prior permission.

Court's Observation

The High Court further observed that the titles accompanying the two videos - referring to alleged denial of justice to MSMEs and stating that “cameras cannot lie” - constituted criminal contempt under Section 2(c)(i) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

Considering that the alleged contemnor is an advocate, the Bench said it was not formally issuing a contempt rule at this stage. However, it directed that notice be served within one week.

Decision

The High Court directed that the advocate shall not participate in any court proceedings in Kerala through online or virtual mode until further orders. The matter has been made returnable on September 7, 2026.

The Registry was also directed to circulate the order among judges and district courts and communicate it to the concerned authorities.

Advertisement

Case Details

Case Title: Suo Motu Proceedings Initiated by the High Court v. Adv. Mathews J. Nedumpara

Case Number: Cont. Case (Crl.) No. 8 of 2026

Judges: Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V.M.

Decision Date: August 20, 2026

Advertisement

Take CourtBook Everywhere

Access your account on the go with our mobile app.

Get it on Google PlayDownload on the App Store
CourtBook Mobile App