New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday clarified that its recent interim order regulating the use of audio and video recordings of court proceedings does not impose a blanket prohibition on reporting by recognised news organisations, while reiterating that such outlets cannot use audio or video clips of judicial proceedings in their coverage.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana issued the clarification after observing that "some confusion persists" regarding paragraph 11 of its July 24 interim order passed in a petition seeking the implementation of a uniform framework for the live streaming and recording of court proceedings across the country.
Clarifying the scope of its earlier directions, the CJI-led Bench said: "The said paragraph makes it clear that the order is not to be construed as imposing a blanket prohibition on the reporting of court proceedings by recognised news outlets."
"Such outlets may, therefore, continue to report on the proceedings and inform the general public of legal developments and judicial pronouncements, save that audio or video clips of the court proceedings shall not be utilised in the course of such reportage," it added.
"In sum, while news outlets may continue to report on the court proceedings, they shall nonetheless remain bound by the restrictions set out in paragraph 10."
Accordingly, the apex court said that paragraph 11 of its July 24 order "stands clarified to that extent".
The Bench also granted the respondents four weeks to file their counter affidavits and posted the matter for further hearing on September 18.
On July 24, the Supreme Court had directed that audio and video recordings of judicial proceedings cannot be extracted, disseminated, monetised, posted, reposted, uploaded, transmitted, modified, stored or hosted on social media or any other digital platform without prior permission from the Secretary General of the apex court or the Registrars General of the respective High Courts.
The interim direction was issued while the court served notice on the writ petition and impleaded all High Courts, along with major social media intermediaries and technology platforms, as parties to the proceedings.
The apex court had also directed the Union government to place before it a proposal, formulated through the nodal ministries, for implementing the reliefs sought in the petition. It further asked all High Courts to submit status reports on the adoption of the Model Rules for live streaming and recording of court proceedings, including the feasibility of continuous and uninterrupted live streaming.
With IANS inputs