Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has directed a litigant to pay Rs 1 lakh cost after he was found ‘audio-recording’ of the court proceedings on his mobile phone.
A bench of Justices Ajay Gadkari and Kamal Khata, on February 27, said that the litigant – Sajid Abdul Jabbar Patel, who was a relative of one of the respondents in the case – offered to pay Rs 1 lakh costs for his ‘misconduct’.
On Thursday, when the bench was hearing a 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 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 a 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 court noted.
When the court advocate Hiten Venegavkar, who represented Patel's relatives (respondents in the case), he informed the court that no such permission to audio-record the proceedings was granted to him and that his conduct could not be ‘justified’.
“Mr. Venegavkar fairly conceded to the fact that no permission was granted to the said person for audio recording the Court proceedings. He fairly submitted that the act of the said person cannot be justified,” the court added.
However, Venegavkar requested the court to show leniency to him as this is his first act. “He (Venegavkar) 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… The said statement is accepted as an undertaking given to this Court,’ the bench said. The HC has kept the matter on March 5 for compliance.
