Calcutta HC Criticizes Misuse Of Recall Provision, Imposes Cost Of Rs 5 Lakh In Case Of Abuse Of Live-Streaming
📌 Principle:
Misuse of the Recall Provision and Abuse of Live-Streaming of Court Proceedings Attract Strict Judicial Disapproval and Penalties.
🟤 Explanation:
1. Recall Provision in Judicial Orders
The recall provision allows a court to review or recall its own orders in exceptional circumstances.
It is designed as a corrective mechanism, used only when there is a manifest error, fraud, or miscarriage of justice.
Misuse of this provision for unwarranted or vexatious litigation causes wastage of judicial time and resources.
2. Live-Streaming of Court Proceedings
Live-streaming aims to promote transparency and public access to justice.
However, it can be misused or abused if:
Parties use it to publicize proceedings selectively.
Sensitive matters are exposed, violating privacy or dignity.
It leads to trial by media or harassment.
3. Judicial Concern and Costs Imposition
Courts have a duty to maintain the sanctity of judicial proceedings.
Misuse of recall provisions and live-streaming abuse undermine judicial decorum.
To deter such conduct, the Calcutta High Court has imposed heavy costs as a punitive and preventive measure.
🧑⚖️ Case Illustration: ABC v. XYZ (Hypothetical Calcutta HC case)
In ABC v. XYZ, the petitioner repeatedly filed recall applications against an order already conclusively passed by the court, with no fresh grounds. Simultaneously, they live-streamed certain hearings selectively, using the platform to create negative public narratives against the opposite party.
Court’s Observations:
“The recall provision is not a tool to harass the opposite party or prolong litigation by filing successive frivolous applications.”
“Live-streaming, while a noble initiative for transparency, must not be weaponized to malign or abuse any party or to breach confidentiality and dignity of proceedings.”
“Misuse of either the recall provision or live-streaming warrants strong measures to prevent abuse and protect the judicial process.”
Judgment:
The Court imposed a cost of Rs 5 lakh on the party misusing the recall provision and live-streaming facility.
It cautioned all litigants that judicial resources and innovations like live-streaming are not to be misused.
Directed the registry to frame guidelines to regulate live-streaming and recall applications.
⚖️ Broader Judicial Principles:
| Aspect | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Recall Provision | Meant for exceptional correction, not routine challenge |
| Live-Streaming | Transparency tool, not a weapon for publicity or harassment |
| Misuse Consequences | Wasting court’s time, breaching decorum, harming parties |
| Judicial Remedies | Imposition of costs and guidelines for regulation |
📝 Conclusion:
The Calcutta High Court’s strict stance against the misuse of recall provisions and abuse of live-streaming underscores the importance of judicial discipline and respect for the process. By imposing substantial costs, the court sends a clear message that:
The judicial process must be respected and preserved.
Innovations like live-streaming must be used responsibly.
Recalls must be invoked only with genuine and substantial grounds.
Frivolous or abusive litigation tactics will attract stern penalties.
This approach strengthens faith in the judiciary and ensures orderly and dignified conduct of court proceedings.
RELATED Blog
0 comments