Court holds that Karnataka Rules on Live Streaming and Recording of Court Proceedings, 2021 do not confer automatic right to obtain copies of archival recordings; archival data not official record unless Bench directs
In a significant judgment dated September 21, 2026, the Karnataka High Court, through Justice C.M. Poonacha, dismissed a writ petition filed by A. Sathyanarayana Swamy seeking access to copies of archival audio-visual recordings of court proceedings. The petitioner had applied under Form III of the Karnataka Rules on Live Streaming and Recording of Court Proceedings, 2021, requesting copies of recordings relating to a specific case (WA No. 929/2025 dated June 16, 2026).
The Assistant Registrar of the High Court had earlier rejected the petitioner's request, relying on Rule 10(1)(ii) of the said Rules, which states that archival data shall not constitute the official record of court proceedings unless otherwise directed by the Bench. The petitioner contended that filing the application in Form III should entitle him to the recordings, asserting a right under Rule 8(3).
Justice Poonacha, after examining the relevant Rules, held that neither Rule 8 nor Rule 10 confers any enforceable right on an applicant to obtain copies of archival recordings as a matter of course. The Court emphasized that archival recordings are stored and retained for a minimum period (usually six months) but do not automatically become part of the official court record unless specifically directed by the Bench. Consequently, in the absence of any such judicial direction, the petitioner had no legal right to demand copies of the archival data.
The Court also underscored the restrictions on the use and dissemination of live-streamed or recorded court proceedings, including prohibitions on unauthorized recording, sharing, or publication, as stipulated under Rule 10(2). Unauthorized use may attract penal provisions under the Indian Copyright Act, Information Technology Act, and law relating to contempt of court.
Rejecting the petition as devoid of merit, the High Court affirmed the Assistant Registrar's decision, thereby reinforcing the principle that archival recordings are not public records accessible at will and remain under the exclusive control and discretion of the Court.
This judgment clarifies the legal position on access to court proceeding recordings in Karnataka, underlining the necessity of specific judicial orders for archival data to be recognized as official records and for copies to be released.
Bottom Line:
Karnataka Rules on Live Streaming and Recording of Court Proceedings, 2021 - Mere filing of application in Form III does not confer an enforceable right to obtain copies of archival recordings - Archival data does not constitute official record of court proceedings unless otherwise directed by Bench - In absence of specific judicial direction, rejection of request for copies of recording is valid.
Statutory provision(s): Karnataka Rules on Live Streaming and Recording of Court Proceedings, 2021 (Rules 8(3), 8(4), 10(1)(ii), 10(2)), Constitution of India Article 14
A. Sathyanarayana Swamy v. High Court of Karnataka, (Karnataka) : Law Finder Doc Id # 3001101
