Bombay High Court Slaps Rs 1 Lakh Costs On Man For Audio-Recording Court Proceedings On Mobile Phone

In a recent order, the Bombay High Court (February 27) imposed a cost of Rs 1 lakh on a litigant who was found to be 'audio-recording' court proceedings on his mobile phone. 

A division bench of Justices Ajay Gadkari and Kamal Khata in the order recorded that the litigant - Sajid Abdul Jabbar Patel, who was a relative of a respondent in a case- offered to pay Rs 1 lakh costs for his 'misconduct.'

The order states that while the bench was hearing a writ petition pertaining to a property dispute between two brothers, Patel, one of the relatives of a private respondent, was found to be using his mobile phone in the courtroom. The judges' court staff found that Patel was audio-recording the proceedings. 

"The concerned Court staff therefore confronted the said person. He informed the Court staff that, he is relative of Respondent Nos.3 & 4. Upon a query by the Court staff, they were informed that, he was not granted any permission by the Registry of this Court to do the said audio recording. Therefore as per the Notice dated February 13, 2017 issued by the Registry, his gadget i.e. mobile phone was seized, switched off and then forwarded to the Registry for safe custody," the order records. 

When asked, advocate Hiten Venegavkar, who represented Patel's relatives (respondents in the case), informed the court that no such permission to audio-record the proceedings was granted to him and that his conduct could not be 'justified.'

"However, Mr Venegavkar requested this Court to show leniency to him as this is his first act and therefore may not to take stringent action against him. He thereafter on instructions from Sajid Abdul Jabbar Patel informed this Court that, for his said misconduct he (Patel) will pay a cost of Rs.1 lakh 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 said statement is accepted as an undertaking given to this Court," the bench said. 

Accepting the statement made by Patel, the bench adjourned the hearing till March 5 for compliance with the instant order. 

Appearance:

Advocate Ajay Patil appeared for the Petitioner.

Advocate Meet Sawant instructed by KP Law Associates LLP represented the Panvel Municipal Corporation.

Advocate Hiten Venegavkar and Harsh Dedhia represented the Private Respondents.

Assistant Government Pleader Savina Crasto represented the State.

Case Title: Sameer Mohammad Yusuf Patel vs Panvel Municipal Corporation (Civil Writ Petition 16293 of 2024)

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 79

Click Here To Read/Download Order