The Kerala High Court has initiated suo motu criminal contempt proceedings against advocate Mathews J. Nedumpara over the alleged unauthorised recording and uploading of court proceedings on YouTube and X, despite repeated warnings.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V.M.took “serious note” of a Registry report which disclosed that court proceedings had allegedly been recorded and uploaded to the YouTube account of the alleged contemnor.
The Court noted that the alleged recording and uploading was done despite repeated warnings and with knowledge that such conduct was contrary to Rule 3(9) of the Electronic Audio-Video Linkage Rules (Kerala), 2025. The Rule expressly provides:
“
“The confidentiality of proceedings conducted under these Rules shall be maintained by all Participants and persons present, and no broadcasting, photographing, publishing, recording, sharing or usage of such proceedings, either wholly or in part, shall be made except with the written permission of the High Court, Court or Forum.”
The Bench observed that the videos in question appeared to contain recordings of the High Court’s proceedings and had been published through
The High Court further relied on the Supreme Court’s interim order dated July 24, 2026 in Harshita Grover v. Union of India & Ors., where the Supreme Court had directed that, as an interim measure, judicial audio-video recordings could not be disseminated or uploaded on social media or other digital platforms without prior permission from the competent authority. The Supreme Court had directed:
“
“As an interim measure, it is directed that there shall be no extraction, dissemination, monetisation, posting, re-posting, uploading, transmitting, modification, storing, or hosting of the audio-video recording(s) of the judicial proceedings on social media or any other digital platforms without prior permission…”
Against this backdrop, the Kerala High Court held that the alleged uploading, dissemination and hosting of recordings of its proceedings through YouTube and X, without prior permission, assumed significance.
The Bench also took objection to the titles under which the videos were published, namely:
“
“You be the judge. Cameras can’t lie. Denial of Justice to MSMEs. Watch full video on my YouTube and X”
The Court held that these titles “constitute criminal contempt within the meaning of Section 2(c)(i) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.”
However, considering that the alleged contemnor is an advocate, the Bench said it was not formally issuing a rule of contempt at this stage. Instead, it directed the Department to serve notice on Nedumpara within one week. The matter has been made returnable on September 7, 2026.
The High Court further ordered that Nedumpara “shall not be allowed to participate in any court proceedings in Kerala through online or virtual mode until further orders.”
