Courtroom drama media consumption trends

Notes

• Supreme Court (SC) interim order (July 24): Barred circulation of audio/video clips of judicial proceedings on social media without prior permission from court registrars.
• Rationale: The Bench (led by CJI Surya Kant) noted that isolated excerpts risk trivialising the administration of justice.
• Exemption: Recognised news outlets may report on proceedings but cannot utilise audio/video clips.
• Legal basis for live-streaming: 2018 SC ruling (Swapnil Tripathi v. Supreme Court of India) recognised live-streaming as part of the right to access justice under Article 21.
• Constitutional principle: 'Sunlight is the best disinfectant' (Justice D.Y. Chandrachud) regarding public right to know.
• Current status: 11 High Courts have operational live-streaming as of March 2026.
• Safeguards: 2021 SC e-Committee Model Rules prohibit unauthorised dissemination and use of footage for commercial/promotional purposes; sensitive cases (matrimonial, sexual assault, juveniles) are excluded from live-streaming.
• Bar Council of India (July 2026): Prohibited reels and promotional content from court premises and mandated social media ethics nodal officers.
• Judicial perspective: Oral observations are often used to test arguments and do not necessarily reflect final orders; concerns raised that social media scrutiny may make judges more circumspect.

Part of a longer story

This is day 7 of 7 in Regulation of court proceeding recordings and social media circulation, which has been running since 7 July 2026. Reading it whole is usually worth more than reading today alone — the exam asks how something developed.

• CJI Surya Kant on misuse of live-streamed proceedings Before
• The whole story 7 entries