Supreme Court clarifies there is no "blanket prohibition on the reporting of court proceedings by recognised news outlets"

In Harshita Grover vs. Union of India & Ors. (2026), Supreme Court's 3-Judge Bench of Chief Justice of India Surya kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana passed a 4-page long order dated July 31, 2026, wherein, it clarified that there is no "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." The Court has impleaded the 25 High Courts including Patna High Court as respondents. The Court also impleaded the digital platforms, namely, LinkedIn, Google, YouTube and X Corp and Meta Platforms Inc. including Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp. The case is listed for further hearing on September 18, 2026. 

In its earlier 8-page long order dated July 24, 2026, the Court had directed the High Courts to submit status reports with respect to the adoption of the Model Rules for live streaming and recording of court proceedings circulated by the Supreme Court. These status reports shall also explain the impact and feasibility of continuous/uninterrupted live streaming. The order reads:"6. The Union of India is directed to put up a proposal with respect to the Nodal Ministries to give effect to the prayers made in the instant Writ Petition. 7. The High Courts shall submit their status reports with respect to the adoption of the Model Rules for live streaming and recording of court proceedings circulated by this Court. Their status reports shall also explain the impact and feasibility of continuous/uninterrupted live streaming. 8. Respondent No.3 will furnish information with respect to all the intermediaries. 9. As an interim measure, it is directed that there shall be no extraction, dissemination, monetisation, posting, re-posting, uploading, transmitting, modification, storing, or hosting of the audio-video recording(s) of the judicial proceedings on social media or any other digital platforms without prior permission of the Secretary General of the Supreme Court of India or the Registrar Generals of the jurisdictional High Courts. 10. The Secretary General of the Supreme Court of India and the Registrar Generals of all the High Courts shall arrange to upload this order on their respective websites for public information. 11. However, it is clarified that this order shall have no bearing on the reporting of Court proceedings by recognized news outlets."

So far the Court's order does not record or reproduce "the prayers made in the instant Writ Petition". The order dated July 31 reads: "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. 3. Accordingly, paragraph 11 of our earlier order dated 24.07.2026 stands clarified to that extent."

Notably, the was filed May 27, 2026, registered on June 5, 2026 and verified on June 9, 2026. Bar Council of India (BCI) is also one of the 38 respondents, which had issued a 37-page long Circular dated July 17, 2026 concerning social media conduct, digital ethics, Court decorum, confidentiality and professional responsibility addressed to all the Chairman Secretaries of all State Bar Councils;the Presidents/Secretaries of all Bar Associations;all Vice-Chancellors/Registrars/Deans/Principals/Directors/Heads of Centres of Legal Education; all Senior Advocates, Advocates, law firms, chambers, legal offices, internship coordinators and legal content creators; all law students, interns, research scholars, students enrolled in LL.B., LL.M., Ph.D., certificate, diploma and other law related courses and all social media intermediaries and digital platforms, for information and cooperation wherever offending content concerning Courts, Judges, Advocates, litigants, Court proceedings or the legal profession is hosted or circulated.  

The 19-page long Model Rules for live streaming and recording of court proceedings circulated by the Supreme Court appears better drafted than the 37-page long circular issued by BCI on the subject of maintenance of dignity, restraint and professional ethics in the use of social media by Advocates, law students and interns; and against making reels/videos, sensational clips or disparaging social media content relating to Court premises, Court proceedings, chambers, judicial hearings, live-streamed proceedings and professional work.