The Bombay High Court has categorically held that video recording of tribunal proceedings evidence cannot be used as admissible proof in any other court of law.

The ruling came while dismissing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that sought mandatory audio-video recording of hearings before the Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission (MERC).

The Division Bench of Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad passed the order on 11 November 2025, rejecting the petitioner’s contention that such recordings would promote transparency and expose irregularities in MERC’s functioning.

Court’s Observations

The Bench observed that judicial and quasi-judicial bodies already operate under established principles ensuring openness and accountability. The law, however, expressly prohibits litigants from using any video recording of tribunal proceedings evidence in another court.

Chief Justice Chandrashekhar clarified that while public hearings are vital to maintain confidence in the justice system, the petitioner had misconstrued the concept of open courts.

The Court stated that a litigant is not permitted to use the true record of proceedings as evidence, adding that recording of proceedings is restricted by settled judicial norms.

The Bench found no merit in the argument that mandatory recording would expose inconsistencies or lapses in the MERC’s proceedings. The judges observed that accepting such a contention would violate the settled position of law and could lead to misuse of judicial recordings.

Bench’s Remarks On The Nature Of PIL

The Court also criticised the nature of the PIL, terming it a private interest litigation masquerading as public interest. The Bench remarked that the petition appeared motivated by personal grievance and a desire for publicity rather than genuine concern for public justice.

According to the Court, such litigations waste valuable judicial time and amount to an abuse of process. The judges further noted that MERC’s 2018 resolution, which prohibits audio-video recording of its hearings, was lawful and did not infringe upon the petitioner’s rights.

Case Information

• Case Title: Kamlakar Ratnakar Shenoy vs Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission (MERC)
• Bench: Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad
• Date of Judgment: 11 November 2025
• Key Holding: Video recording of tribunal proceedings cannot be used as evidence in any other court of law.

Follow The Legal QnA For More Updates…