Bombay high court seizes phone for unauthorized recording, man pays Rs 1 lakh for 'misconduct'.

Mumbai: Bombay high court on Thursday seized a mobile phone from a man found audio recording the court proceedings without any permission. For his "misconduct," the man offered to pay Rs 1 lakh towards the High Court Employees Medical Welfare Fund in Mumbai.Justices AS Gadkari and Kamal Khata were hearing a petition filed last year by one Sameer Patel against the Panvel Municipal Corporation and others. At 4.30 pm, the court staff noticed a man, Sajid Abdul Jabbar Patel, audio recording the proceedings on his device. When confronted by the staff, he gave his name and said he was a relative of two of the respondents. He admitted he had no permission to record. Acting on a February 13, 2017, HC administration notice, the court seized his cell phone, switched it off, and sent it to the Registry for safe custody.The HC brought the incident to the notice of Public Prosecutor HS Venegaonkar, who conceded that the man had no permission to record and that the recording was "not justified." Venegaonkar, who appeared for the respondents, however, sought leniency from the HC since it was the man's first such act. The HC accepted the man's undertaking to pay and sought a compliance report by March 5. Mumbai: Bombay high court on Thursday seized a mobile phone from a man found audio recording the court proceedings without any permission. For his "misconduct," the man offered to pay Rs 1 lakh towards the High Court Employees Medical Welfare Fund in Mumbai.Justices AS Gadkari and Kamal Khata were hearing a petition filed last year by one Sameer Patel against the Panvel Municipal Corporation and others. At 4.30 pm, the court staff noticed a man, Sajid Abdul Jabbar Patel, audio recording the proceedings on his device. When confronted by the staff, he gave his name and said he was a relative of two of the respondents. He admitted he had no permission to record. Acting on a February 13, 2017, HC administration notice, the court seized his cell phone, switched it off, and sent it to the Registry for safe custody.The HC brought the incident to the notice of Public Prosecutor HS Venegaonkar, who conceded that the man had no permission to record and that the recording was "not justified." Venegaonkar, who appeared for the respondents, however, sought leniency from the HC since it was the man's first such act. The HC accepted the man's undertaking to pay and sought a compliance report by March 5.
Stay updated with breaking news, weather updates, bank holidays and upcoming public holidays in march.