Read Time: 05 minutes
It was argued that “no permission was granted to the said person for audio recording the Court proceedings. He fairly submitted that, the act of the said person cannot be justified”. However, it was prayed that “this Court to show leniency to him as this is his first act and therefore may not to take stringent action against him”.
The Bombay High Court, recently, imposed a cost of INR 1,00,000 for recording the courtroom proceedings without any authorization from the court registry.
The bench of Justice A. S. Gadkari and Justice Kamal Khata held, “for his said misconduct Mr. Sajid Abdul Jabbar Patel will pay a cost of Rs.1,00,000/- to the High Court Employees Medical Welfare Fund at Mumbai, within a period of three days from the date of uploading of the present Order on the official website of the High Court of Bombay”.
The issue arose when a court staff observed an individual engaged in audio recording of the Court proceedings. Upon noticing this, the concerned court staff confronted the individual. In response, he stated that he was a relative of one of the parties whose case was listed before the concerned court. When inquired further, the individual admitted that he had not obtained prior permission from the Registry of the court for such recording.
In accordance with the Notice dated 13th February 2017, issued by the Registry, his mobile phone, which was used for the unauthorized recording, was seized, switched off, and subsequently forwarded to the Registry for safe custody. Upon further questioning, the individual presented his Aadhar Card, which identified him as Mr. Sajid Abdul Jabbar Patel, a resident of Village Owe, Panvel, District Raigad.
The aforementioned incident was thereafter brought to the attention of Advocate Venegavkar, who was representing the case. Venegavkar candidly acknowledged that no authorization had been granted to the said individual for recording the court proceedings. He also conceded that the individual's actions could not be justified.
However, he urged the Court to exercise leniency, considering that this was the individual's first such act. He further submitted, upon receiving instructions from Mr. Sajid Abdul Jabbar Patel, that the latter was willing to make amends for his misconduct.
As a consequence, Sajid Abdul Jabbar Patel undertook to deposit a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards the High Court Employees Medical Welfare Fund in Mumbai within three days from the date of uploading of the present order on the official website of the High Court of Bombay.
For Petitioner: Advocate Ajay S. Patil For Respondent: Advocates Meet Sawant, H.S. Venegavkar and Harsh DedhiaFor State: Additional Government Pleader Savina R. CrastoCase Title: Sameer Mohammad Yusuf Patel v The Panvel Municipal Corporation (CIVIL WP. 16293 OF 2024)
Please Login or Register
