Gujarat High Court Recommends Regular Deletion of Online Court Hearing Recordings
On Tuesday, a Division Bench of the Gujarat High Court, comprising Justices AS Supehia and Gita Gopi, recommended that the Chief Justice of the High Court consider removing videos of live-streamed court proceedings from YouTube after a specified period. The Bench emphasized that the final decision on the matter rests with Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal, directing the court registry to bring the issue to her attention.
2/6/20251 min read
This observation arose during a hearing involving advocate Deepak Khosla and his client, the Gujarat Operational Creditors Association, who had relied on unauthorized transcripts of live-streamed court proceedings as evidence—an action that violated the Gujarat High Court (Live Streaming of Court Proceedings) Rules, 2021. The Court strongly condemned this misuse, stating that the rules explicitly prohibit the use of such recordings as evidence and allow for contempt proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, if violated.
The case concerned an application filed by the Gujarat Operational Creditors Association, which had accused three High Court judges of misconduct and alleged contempt of court by senior lawyers representing Arcelor Mittal Nippon Steel India. The allegations arose from the continued extension of an interim stay order issued on August 8 of the previous year, which was periodically renewed despite an application seeking its vacation. Advocate Khosla argued that these extensions violated Supreme Court directives and sought contempt proceedings against the senior advocates involved.
The matter had already seen two judges—Justices Sangeeta Vishen and Vaibhavi D. Nanavati—recuse themselves, prompting Khosla to accuse them of judicial indiscipline. Similar allegations were leveled against Justice Nikhil S. Kariel, who subsequently handled the case. During arguments, Khosla submitted a 259-page transcript derived from YouTube recordings of court proceedings.
Unimpressed by these claims, the High Court dismissed the application, describing it as “an epitome of frivolity,” and imposed costs of ₹22 lakhs on Khosla’s client for wasting judicial time. The Court reiterated its disapproval of using live-streamed proceedings as evidence and suggested that such videos be regularly removed from YouTube to prevent misuse.