Full Breakdown
Supreme Court Orders New Measures to curb Commercial Use of Live-Streamed Court Proceedings
By Drooid · · How we work
In this breakdown
01
Core Directive and Immediate Action
On October 30, 2026, the Supreme Court, in a bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant, directed the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) to draft a policy that prevents the commercial exploitation of live-streamed judicial footage. The court reiterated its earlier interim order that bans unauthorised extraction, modification, and monetisation of audio-video recordings without prior permission from the Secretary General of the Supreme Court or the relevant High Court registrar. The bench also asked that any material already uploaded in breach of the order be removed promptly.
02
Background and Prior Orders
A subsequent clarification on October 9, 2026 reaffirmed that the ban does not constitute a blanket prohibition on news reporting; recognised news outlets may still report on proceedings, provided they do not use audio-video clips without clearance.
03
Official Statements & Responses
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta informed the bench that suggestions from various High Courts and other stakeholders had already been forwarded to MeitY, and that the ministry would prepare a “formula” for the court’s consideration within a few days. Chief Justice Kant noted that the court is examining whether an unfettered right of use exists without judicial supervision.
04
Stakeholder Input on Technical Safeguards
Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing as an intervenor, urged the adoption of digital watermarking and cryptographic signing for every official clip released by the court. He argued that such measures would allow the public and platforms to authenticate genuine footage and prevent manipulation or unauthorised commercial use.
05
Verbatim Quotes
- “Yes, that is what we are directing. Authorities under the concerned intermediary rules shall immediately act and implement this order,” — Justice Bagchi. In
- “Even authenticated cannot be commercialised; that’s the problem.” — Prashant Bhushan, watermark suggestion advocate
- “That YouTuber will be duty-bound to take permission from the Secretary General of the Supreme Court.” — Justice Bagchi, extract from official
06
What’s Next
The bench indicated it will review the United Kingdom’s guidelines on court-record usage and will consider further procedural refinements once practical challenges to implementation are identified.