---
title: "Rights Activists Challenge Supreme Court Restrictions on Court Livestream Sharing"
url: https://projectchintan.com/article/rights-activists-challenge-supreme-court-restrictions-on-court-livestream-sharin-y890o
publisher: Project Chintan
author: Project Chintan Newsroom
section: India
published: 2026-07-31T06:55:51.000Z
modified: 2026-07-31T09:01:37.519Z
language: en-IN
---

# Rights Activists Challenge Supreme Court Restrictions on Court Livestream Sharing

Advocates Anjali Bhardwaj and Amrita Johri have filed a legal challenge against a directive limiting the dissemination of court proceedings. They argue the order undermines constitutional guarantees of judicial transparency and public accountability.

## Key takeaways

- Activists Anjali Bhardwaj and Amrita Johri filed an application against the July 24 order restricting the sharing of court livestreams.
- Legal counsel argues the restriction violates Article 21's guarantee of fair procedure and the principle of open justice.
- The Supreme Court previously cited concerns over trolling and reputational harm to judges as the basis for the restrictions.
- The applicants suggest authorized recordings and clear re-use terms are better alternatives to administrative bans.
- The case is set for a hearing on July 31 before a Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant.

## Constitutional Concerns Over Digital Access

Legal activists Anjali Bhardwaj and Amrita Johri are contesting a Supreme Court directive that restricts the circulation of livestreamed judicial proceedings. Represented by advocates Prashant Bhushan and Cheryl D’Souza, the applicants argue that the July 24 order contradicts the principle of open justice. This principle, they contend, is a constitutional mandate under Article 21, ensuring the judiciary remains accountable and free from arbitrary procedures.

## The Collision of Transparency and Individual Protection

The controversy stems from an interim order issued by a Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant. The court previously moved to ban the recording, modification, and monetization of court broadcasts across digital platforms without explicit administrative permission. Justices reasoned that unregulated distribution exposes judges and lawyers to social media harassment, potentially damaging public trust in the legal system.

The activists counter that current restrictions are overly broad, highlighting several specific risks to public interest:
- Individual rights to fair and accurate representation are curtailed by administrative barriers.
- Journalistic and public sharing now depends on the discretion of the Secretary General or Registrar General.
- The order fails to differentiate between bad-faith actors using morphed clips and citizens sharing proceedings in good faith.

### Proposed Alternatives to Total Restrictions

Rather than imposing a blanket prohibition, the application suggests that the court provide official, authorized recordings. By establishing clear terms for re-use and dissemination, the activists argue the judiciary can combat misinformation without sacrificing transparency. The applicants maintain that access to justice must not become a privilege granted by administrators, but remain a public right that allows for scrutiny of the legal process. The matter is scheduled for consideration on Friday, July 31.

Source: The Hindu — National

---
Canonical: https://projectchintan.com/article/rights-activists-challenge-supreme-court-restrictions-on-court-livestream-sharin-y890o
Reported from: The Hindu — National