In re: Unauthorized recording of court proceedings

The Bombay High Court initiated action against a junior advocate and a clerk for recording court proceedings without authorization. The court confiscated the mobile device used for the recording and imposed monetary fines of ₹25,000 on the advocate and ₹10,000 on the clerk.

Type: Court matter
State: Maharashtra
Court / station: Bombay High Court
Watching: 0

Contempt of court

Case details

AI-extracted — may be inaccurate

Judgment delivered: 22 Oct 2026
Verdict: Fined

Judgement

The court held that recording proceedings without permission constitutes an interference with the judicial process and a breach of court decorum, directing the parties to deposit costs for the unauthorized act.

Updates

News23 Oct 2026
Bombay High Court Confiscates Mobile And Fines Junior Lawyer, Clerk For Illegal Courtroom Recording
The Court directed the clerk and a junior advocate to deposit costs of ₹10,000 and ₹25,000, respectively,
Explanation in simple terms
What:
The court seized a mobile phone and ordered a junior lawyer and a clerk to pay money.
Who:
The Bombay High Court is the court, and a junior lawyer and a clerk are the people involved.
When:
Reported on 23 Oct 2026.
Where:
Bombay High Court, Maharashtra.
Why:
The court punished them for making an unauthorized recording of court proceedings.
What it means:
The court confiscated the phone and imposed a fine on the individuals for their actions.
Verdictum
News22 Oct 2026
Bombay High Court strict on recording court proceedings without permission, orders junior lawyer to deposit ₹25,000 and clerk to deposit ₹10,000
Explanation in simple terms
What:
The court ordered a junior lawyer and a clerk to pay money for recording proceedings without permission.
Who:
The Bombay High Court issued the order against a junior lawyer and a clerk.
When:
Reported on 22 Oct 2026.
Where:
Bombay High Court, Maharashtra.
Why:
The court acted because they recorded court proceedings without getting the necessary permission.
What it means:
The junior lawyer must deposit 25,000 rupees and the clerk must deposit 10,000 rupees.
Law Trend

Similar Cases

On trial

Contempt petition regarding detention of protesters and journalists during protest against CEC

A contempt of court petition has been filed in the Supreme Court of India against the Delhi Police following allegations of mass detentions, the detention of journalists, and the use of excessive force during a protest organized by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) and other groups on October 10, 2026.

Delhi24 sources

3 days ago1 Watching

Judgment delivered

Sachin Yadav vs State of Uttar Pradesh

The Allahabad High Court addressed a contempt of court matter concerning the non-compliance with a non-bailable warrant (NBW) issued by the court. The court clarified that misbehaviour with lawyers discharging their duties during court proceedings constitutes contempt, and emphasized the duty of police officers to personally ensure the execution of NBWs issued by the High Court.

Uttar Pradesh3 sources

3 days ago0 Watching

Under investigation

Petitioner vs Indian National Congress and Others — Contempt plea regarding social media posts against Chief Justice of India

A petition has been filed in the Supreme Court of India seeking contempt action against the Kerala Congress and other individuals, including Mahua Moitra, for social media posts targeting the Chief Justice of India, Surya Kant. The plea also requests the court to issue guidelines to prevent political parties from conducting public campaigns against judges.

In re: Unauthorized recording of court proceedings

Case details

Updates

Bombay High Court Confiscates Mobile And Fines Junior Lawyer, Clerk For Illegal Courtroom Recording

Bombay High Court strict on recording court proceedings without permission, orders junior lawyer to deposit ₹25,000 and clerk to deposit ₹10,000

Similar Cases

Contempt petition regarding detention of protesters and journalists during protest against CEC

Sachin Yadav vs State of Uttar Pradesh

Petitioner vs Indian National Congress and Others — Contempt plea regarding social media posts against Chief Justice of India

Supreme Court Bar Association vs Nikhil Wagle and Sanjay Raut

Contempt petition regarding CJP protest movement restrictions

A. Inamdar and others vs State of Maharashtra

Discussion