PolityGovernance
News 22 of 22

SC Bars Posting Court Proceedings on Social Media Without Prior Permission, Seeks Centre's Response

PolityHIGH
Target:UPSC GS-IIMPSCSSC GATeachingPrelims HighMains MediumStatic GK Link
24 Jul 2026
~2 min
Source: The Hindu
Key Data:July 24, 2026
Bodies:Supreme Court of India
Practice MCQs from today's news ▸
What This Article Covers

1.Supreme Court bars posting, reposting, or uploading of court proceedings on social media without prior permission from the Secretary General of the SC or Registrar Generals of HCs.

2.A Bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana sought responses from the Centre on a plea regarding misuse of live-streamed court videos.

3.Senior advocate Vikas Singh and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta agreed on the need for regulation of court proceedings on digital platforms.

The Big Picture
Prelims · HighMains · Medium

The Supreme Court has issued an interim order banning the posting, reposting, or uploading of audio-video recordings of court proceedings on social media without prior permission from the Secretary General of the Supreme Court or Registrar Generals of High Courts. This move addresses the misuse of live-streamed court proceedings and has significant implications for judicial transparency, privacy, and contempt of court laws.

Exam Lens

Quick Exam Facts From News

Date of OrderJuly 24, 2026
BenchCJI Surya Kant, Justices Joymalya Bagchi, V. Mohana
Interim DirectionNo posting/uploading of AV recordings of judicial proceedings on social media without prior permission
Permission Authority (SC)Secretary General of the Supreme Court
Permission Authority (HC)Registrar General of the jurisdictional High Court

1-Minute Revision

  • ›Date of Order: July 24, 2026
  • ›Bench: CJI Surya Kant, Justices Joymalya Bagchi, V. Mohana
  • ›Target this Data: July 24, 2026 - date of the Supreme Court's interim order.
  • ›Target this Nodal Body: Supreme Court of India (the order was passed by a Bench of CJI Surya Kant, Justices Joymalya Bagchi & V. Mohana).
  • ›Target this Legal Point: The order requires prior permission from the Secretary General of the Supreme Court or Registrar General of the jurisdictional High Court for posting proceedings on social media.

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

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

Q1Static LinkageEasy

As per the Supreme Court's interim order, from whom must prior permission be obtained to post audio-video recordings of Supreme Court proceedings on social media?

Q2Statement-basedHard

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

1. The order bars the posting, reposting, or uploading of audio-video recordings of court proceedings on social media without prior permission.

2. The order applies only to proceedings of the Supreme Court and not to High Courts.

3. The Bench also sought responses from the Centre on a plea regarding the misuse of such recordings.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Q3Data-centricMedium

On which date did the Supreme Court pass the interim order barring the posting of court proceedings on social media without prior permission?

Q4Application/ImpactMedium

What is the primary objective of the Supreme Court's interim order restricting the posting of court proceedings on social media?

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

SC Seeks Centre Reply on PIL: Minors' Online Accounts Without Valid Contracts Under Section 11 Indian Contract Act

A PIL filed by Just Rights for Children Alliance has challenged the practice of allowing minors to independently sign up for digital platforms without verified parental consent. The Supreme Court has issued notice to the Centre, highlighting the legal gap between Section 11 of the Indian Contract Act (barring minors from contracts) and existing IT/DPDP rules.

Polity Current Affairs

SC Proposes Exempting Current Class 6 from Three-Language Policy; Centre Seeks More Time

The Supreme Court has proposed exempting the current Class 6 batch from the mandatory three-language policy, suggesting implementation from January 1, 2027. The Centre has sought more time to decide, while the court has asked for details on teacher availability and infrastructure.

Polity Current Affairs

Maharashtra Panel Recommends BNS Amendment for Social Media Defamation After 11 Years of 66A

A Maharashtra government committee has recommended amending the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) to specifically criminalize defamatory social media posts, 11 years after the Supreme Court struck down Section 66A of the IT Act. The move aims to tackle online defamation while incorporating safeguards against misuse, but faces legal scrutiny over potential conflict with free speech rights under Article 19(1)(a).

Polity Current Affairs

Supreme Court Seeks Centre's Response on CAPF Act 2026 Challenged for Violating Articles 14, 16, 21

The Supreme Court has questioned the constitutional validity of the Central Armed Police Forces (General Administration) Act, 2026, which mandates IPS officer deputation to senior CAPF posts, potentially overriding a 2025 SC judgment. This case tests the separation of powers and the rights of CAPF cadre officers under Articles 14, 16, and 21.

Polity Current Affairs

Maharashtra Panel Recommends BNS Amendment for Defamatory Social Media Posts; Shreya Singhal Precedent

A Maharashtra government panel has recommended amending the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) to specifically criminalize defamatory social media posts, reviving the spirit of the now-struck-down Section 66A of the IT Act. This raises critical constitutional questions about balancing free speech (Article 19(1)(a)) with the right to reputation (Article 21), especially after the Supreme Court struck down Section 66A in Shreya Singhal vs Union of India (2015) for vagueness and overbreadth. For exam aspirants, understanding the legal framework of defamation, the concept of reasonable restrictions, and the proportionality standard is crucial.

Polity Current Affairs

SC Orders Centre to Appoint Nodal Officer for Indians Killed/Missing in Russia-Ukraine War

The Supreme Court has directed the Central Government to appoint a Nodal Officer specifically to assist the families of Indian nationals who have been killed or are missing in the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict. This directive underscores the judiciary's role in ensuring the executive fulfills its duty towards citizens affected by international crises.

Polity Current Affairs

Supreme Court Directs States to Revisit Raising Judicial Officers' Retirement Age to 61 in 2 Weeks

The Supreme Court has held that States cannot use financial burden as a valid ground to oppose enhancing the retirement age of judicial officers. It has directed all States/UTs to decide within two weeks, in consultation with High Courts, on allowing district judges to serve up to 61 years while a petition for uniform 62 years remains pending.