PolityJudiciary
News 0 of 25

SC Order: News Outlets Can Report but Cannot Use Audio-Video Clips of Court Proceedings

PolityHIGH
Target:UPSC GS-IIMPSCSSC GATeachingPrelims HighMains MediumStatic GK Link
05 Aug 2026
~2 min
Source: The Hindu
Key Data:July 31, 2026July 24, 2026CJI Surya KantAnjali BhardwajAmrita JohriPrashant Bhushan
Bodies:Supreme Court
Practice MCQs from today's news ▸
What This Article Covers

1.Supreme Court's July 31 order clarifies that news outlets may report proceedings but cannot 'utilise' audio-video clips on social media or digital platforms.

2.The order resolves confusion over the July 24 interim direction that had barred extraction and dissemination of audio-video recordings without prior permission.

3.Activists argued the ban violates the 'principle of open justice' upheld in previous judgments; the court plans to lay down a protocol for accessing archives.

The Big Picture
Prelims · HighMains · Medium

The Supreme Court clarified on July 31 that recognized news outlets can report court proceedings but cannot use audio-video clips of hearings on digital platforms. This order balances open justice with preventing commercial exploitation of livestreamed proceedings.

Exam Lens

Quick Exam Facts From News

Order DateJuly 31, 2026
Earlier OrderJuly 24, 2026
BenchCJI Surya Kant-led Bench
ApplicantsAnjali Bhardwaj & Amrita Johri
Key PrincipleOpen Justice

1-Minute Revision

  • ›Order Date: July 31, 2026
  • ›Earlier Order: July 24, 2026
  • ›Target this Data: July 31, 2026 – date of clarification order
  • ›Target this Nodal Body: Supreme Court of India
  • ›Target this Legal Point: Principle of open justice and its limitations

Mastered this topic? Test your knowledge with a full MCQ quiz.

Practice exam-style questions, track your score, and strengthen your recall.

Q1Static LinkageEasy

Which institution issued the order clarifying that news outlets can report court proceedings but cannot use audio-video clips?

Q2Statement-basedHard

Consider the following statements regarding the Supreme Court's orders on court proceedings:

1. The July 31, 2026 order prohibits recognized news outlets from reporting court proceedings.

2. The July 24, 2026 interim order required prior permission for extraction of audio-video recordings of judicial proceedings.

3. The applicants argued that the ban violated the principle of open justice.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Q3Data-centricMedium

Who headed the Supreme Court bench that passed the July 31, 2026 order on news outlets and audio-video clips?

Q4Application/ImpactMedium

What was the primary concern raised by the activists Anjali Bhardwaj and Amrita Johri against the July 24 interim order?

All 25 MCQs ▸
You finished this topic
Explore Related Topics
Related Current Affairs
Polity Current Affairs

Supreme Court Clarifies July 31 Order: Media Can Report Proceedings But Cannot Use Audio-Video Clips

The Supreme Court clarified that news outlets can report court proceedings but cannot use audio or video clips in their reports. This balances open justice with preventing misuse of selective clips. Key for understanding judicial transparency and media regulation.

Polity Current Affairs

Chhattisgarh HC Rules Shariyat Court Cannot Legally Dissolve Marriage; Triple Talaq Order Set Aside

Chhattisgarh High Court held that a Shariyat Court's declaration of triple talaq (Talaq-e-Hasan) has no legal authority. The judgment reinforces the supremacy of constitutional law over religious decrees, a crucial topic for UPSC mains on secularism and Uniform Civil Code.

Polity Current Affairs

Supreme Court Rules NCSC Cannot Issue Binding Directions Under Article 338

The Supreme Court clarified that the National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC) has only recommendatory and advisory powers under Article 338, not adjudicatory powers. It cannot issue binding orders in service disputes. This ruling sets boundaries for constitutional commissions under Articles 338, 338A, and 338B.

Polity Current Affairs

SC Replaces 2023 Gender Stereotype Handbook with 2026 Report on Compassionate Court Practices for Trial Judges

The Supreme Court has released a new report replacing its 2023 gender stereotype handbook, shifting focus from language to courtroom trauma. It mandates trial judges to develop an 'Emotional Quotient', control aggressive cross-examinations, and prevent secondary traumatisation of sexual assault survivors, following the Allahabad HC's controversial 'preparation vs attempt' ruling.

Polity Current Affairs

Supreme Court Rules Police Cannot Independently Investigate Sex Determination Cases Under PC&PNDT Act

The Supreme Court has ruled that police cannot independently investigate offences under the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994. Only the Appropriate Authority, a specialised body under the Act, can investigate. Police may assist but cannot take over the investigation, and any separate criminal offences (IPC/BNS) can be investigated independently. This clarifies a long-standing legal confusion and is crucial for understanding the enforcement mechanism of this social legislation.

Polity Current Affairs

Supreme Court Split Verdict: Justice Dipankar Datta Terms Centre's Remarks on Collegium 'Disquieting'

In a split verdict, Justice Dipankar Datta of the Supreme Court strongly defended the collegium system, terming the Centre's oral criticism as 'disingenuous, evasive and disquieting'. The judgment reaffirms the judiciary's independence in appointments and warns against undermining institutional integrity. Essential for UPSC Polity (Judicial Appointments, Separation of Powers).

Polity Current Affairs

Supreme Court Questions Fairness of PM-Led Panel for CEC Appointment Under 2023 Act

The Supreme Court has questioned whether the selection of the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners by a PM-led committee (with a Union Minister and LoP) demonstrates 'fairness'. The Centre defended the process citing constitutional trust, but the court hinted at the need for a more independent mechanism. This is crucial for understanding the debate on institutional independence and the Election Commission's autonomy.

Polity Current Affairs

SC Stays HC Order Declaring NSEI as 'Public Authority' Under RTI Act Section 2(h)

The Supreme Court has stayed a Delhi High Court order that declared the National Stock Exchange of India (NSEI) a 'public authority' under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act. This means citizens cannot currently enforce their right to information from NSEI. The case challenges whether a stock exchange, though controlled by the government, should be treated as a public authority.