Madhya Pradesh High Court Limits Sharing of Live Court Proceedings on Social Media, Calling It a Mockery of the Justice System.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has prohibited all social media platforms, individuals, video creators, media agencies, and the public from editing, altering, or unlawfully using or sharing its live-streamed court proceedings immediately. This decision came after a writ petition highlighted the widespread misuse of these proceedings, which were being distorted to gain views. Chief Justice Suresh Kumar Kait stated, “Until further notice, we restrain all mentioned parties from editing or illegally using any live-streamed court videos. Any content that violates Rule 11(b) of the 2021 Rules must be removed from the respective platforms.”
The petitioner also requested appropriate criminal action against those who have breached the Madhya Pradesh Live-Streaming and Recording Rules for Court Proceedings, 2021, to uphold justice. Additionally, they sought an investigation into the profits made by those unlawfully using the live-streamed court proceedings and their recovery. Furthermore, the petitioner asked for the establishment of specific guidelines regarding live-streaming and the related procedures.
The Court noted that even though Rule 11(b) of the Madhya Pradesh Live-Streaming Rules for Court Proceedings, 2021 exists, there is a problem with how live court proceedings are being used. Respondents 5 to 7 have mocked the justice system by uploading and sharing edited clips of court sessions as “Memes,” “Reels,” and “Shorts” on platforms like WhatsApp, Instagram, and Facebook. The Court provided examples of this misuse, explaining that snippets of live proceedings are edited and shared on these platforms. Sometimes, different YouTube channels post the same video with various catchy titles, which increases views and attracts sponsorships for those channels.
The Court emphasized that any social media platform wishing to share court proceedings must do so strictly according to the guidelines set out in Rule 11(b) of the 2021 Rules, and not in any other way.
Cause Title: Dr. Vijay Bajaj vs. Union of India and Others
Appearances:
Petitioner- Advocate Utkarsh Agrawal
Respondent- Senior Advocate Sanjay K. Agrawal, Advocate Sandeep Shukla, Advocate Mihir Agrawal and Additional Advocate General Harpreet Singh Ruprah.
