Mr saurav Das, a Puducherry activist filed an application before the Supreme Court seeking to know the delay in implementation of live streaming with reference to the case of Swapnil Tripathi V. Supreme Court of India.
In the verdict of Swapnil Tripathi the apex court on September 26th, 2018 laid down elaborate guidelines and modalities for live-streaming and also held that the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 will have to be suitably amended to provide for the regulatory framework for live streaming. The Supreme court in the verdict said that “Sunlight is the best disinfectant. Live-streaming as an extension of the principle of open courts will ensure that the interface between a court hearing with virtual reality will result in the dissemination of information in the widest possible sense, imparting transparency and accountability to the judicial process”.
Swapnil Tripathi received the following reply when he sought to know about the delay that- Judicial orders have been passed and the matter is under the consideration of the Registry”. The reply is surprising because the Registry has no power or authority to sit over a matter & delay in which the Court has passed a judgment.