DEEPAK KHOSLA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to declare that the petitioner is entitled to nonintrusively audio-record judicial proceedings that involve his participation before this Court and to so record either by himself or through his advocate on record; to issue a writ of prohibition or a writ of any other nature or description to command the respondent Nos.3 and 4, the Registrar General and the Registrar of this Court, not to interfere with the act of non-intrusive audio-recording by the petitioner or his advocate on record in respect of judicial proceedings that involve the petitioner; and to issue any further order / direction in the interest of justice, equity and in furtherance of or to secure any other objective or purpose as this Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

(2.) When the matter was listed before the learned Single Judge on 25.2.2011, he had passed the following order:

(3.) On the basis of the aforesaid order, a larger Bench has been constituted and the matter has been placed before us.