Supreme Court Clarifies News Outlets Can Report Court Proceedings, But Cannot Use Audio or Video Clips

Supreme Court says recognised media organisations are free to report court proceedings but cannot use audio or video clips of hearings without permission.

Key Highlights

• Supreme Court clarified that recognised news organisations can continue reporting court proceedings.

• The restriction applies only to the use of audio and video clips from court hearings.

• Uploading, editing or monetising court hearing clips without permission remains prohibited.

• The matter has been listed for further hearing on September 18, 2026.

The Supreme Court of India has clarified that its recent interim order restricting the sharing and uploading of audio-video recordings of court proceedings does not prevent recognised news organisations from reporting on court hearings.

The Court emphasized that the restriction is limited only to the use of audio and video clips of court proceedings and should not be interpreted as a blanket ban on judicial reporting.

The clarification was issued by a Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana while hearing a batch of petitions concerning the live streaming and recording of court proceedings.

Why Did the Supreme Court Issue the Clarification?

The Bench observed that confusion had arisen regarding Paragraph 11 of its interim order dated July 24, 2026, which stated that recognised news outlets would not be barred from reporting judicial proceedings.

To remove any ambiguity, the Court observed:

"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."

The Court made it clear that journalists and recognised media organisations may continue informing the public about court proceedings, legal developments and judicial pronouncements.

Audio and Video Clips Still Cannot Be Used

While permitting normal news reporting, the Supreme Court reiterated that recognised media organisations cannot use audio or video clips of court proceedings in their reports.

The Court stated:

"Such outlets may 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."

Thus, the prohibition continues only with respect to the use of courtroom recordings.

What Does the July 24 Interim Order Prohibit?

The Court referred to Paragraph 10 of its earlier interim order, which restricts:

• Extraction of court hearing recordings

• Editing audio or video clips

• Uploading recordings on social media

• Reposting court hearing videos

• Disseminating recordings on digital platforms

• Monetising court hearing clips

These activities cannot be undertaken without prior permission from the Registrar General of the concerned Supreme Court or High Court.

RTI Activists Allowed to Intervene

During the hearing, the Supreme Court also allowed an intervention application filed by RTI activists, who oppose a blanket prohibition on sharing court proceeding clips.

The Court permitted them to assist in the proceedings as intervenors.

Next Hearing Scheduled for September 18

The Bench adjourned the matter until September 18, 2026, granting time to:

• Union Government

• High Courts

• Social media intermediaries

• Other stakeholders

to submit their responses.

Background of the Case

The matter arises from a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by journalist Harshita Grover.

The petition seeks guidelines regulating the:

• Clipping of courtroom proceedings

• Editing of recordings

• Dissemination on digital platforms

• Monetisation of court hearing videos

According to the petition, selective and out-of-context circulation of courtroom exchanges on social media undermines the dignity of courts and erodes public confidence in the justice delivery system.

Earlier Directions by the Supreme Court

While issuing its interim order on July 24, 2026, the Supreme Court:

• Issued notice on the PIL.

• Impleaded all High Courts.

• Directed the Union Government to identify the nodal ministries responsible for implementing the proposed framework.

• Asked High Courts to submit reports regarding the adoption of the Supreme Court's model live-streaming guidelines.

• Sought details on the impact of continuous live streaming of judicial proceedings.

• Issued notices to social media platforms, including Meta and X (formerly Twitter).

Key Takeaways

• Recognised news organisations can continue reporting Supreme Court and High Court proceedings.

• The Court clarified there is no blanket ban on legal reporting.

• Audio and video clips of court proceedings cannot be used without prior permission.

• Editing, uploading, reposting or monetising courtroom recordings remains prohibited.

• RTI activists have been allowed to intervene in the matter.

• The case will next be heard on September 18, 2026.

Case Details

Case: Harshita Grover v. Union of India & Others

Case Number: W.P.(C) No. 751/2026

Court: Supreme Court of India

Bench: CJI Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi & Justice V. Mohana