Kapil Sibal Opposes Live Streaming of SC Proceedings in RG Kar Hospital Case; CJI Chandrachud Stands Firm

 In a heated moment at the Supreme Court, senior advocate Kapil Sibal voiced strong objections to the live streaming of proceedings in the RG Kar Medical College and Hospital case, fearing it could damage his professional reputation. However, Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud firmly refused to stop the broadcast, asserting the court’s commitment to openness and transparency.

The case, which revolves around the conditions and management of Kolkata’s RG Kar Hospital, has attracted significant public attention. The Supreme Court’s live streaming initiative, launched in 2022, was designed to bring more transparency to the judicial process, letting the public observe court proceedings firsthand.

Kapil Sibal's Concerns

Sibal, known for his decades-long legal career, expressed serious concern about how the live streaming could affect him personally. “A reputation built over five decades would be destroyed by the live streaming of the case,” he stated during the hearing. Sibal was worried that courtroom exchanges, which can be complex and easily misinterpreted, might be distorted in the eyes of the public or media.

His remarks reflect a growing unease among some legal professionals who fear that live broadcasting high-profile cases could invite sensationalism or lead to misjudgments by those not fully familiar with the legal intricacies involved.

CJI Chandrachud's Response

CJI Chandrachud, however, did not budge. He emphasized the importance of transparency, saying, “The court operates openly.” The Chief Justice made it clear that the live streaming of Supreme Court cases is here to stay, reaffirming the judiciary’s role in ensuring public access to its processes.

Chandrachud’s stance is in line with the broader push for transparency in India’s courts, where live streaming is viewed as a way to demystify the legal system and foster a better understanding of the judiciary’s work.

Balancing Transparency and Privacy

This clash brings to light a larger debate about the pros and cons of live-streaming court proceedings. While advocates believe it enhances transparency and public engagement, critics like Sibal worry about the potential downsides, including privacy concerns and the risk of misrepresentation. High-profile cases, such as the RG Kar Hospital case, often attract media attention, which can sometimes lead to the courtroom being treated like a spectacle.

For now, CJI Chandrachud has made it clear that live streaming will continue, despite the concerns raised by veteran lawyers like Sibal. As the RG Kar Hospital case moves forward, the public, thanks to live streaming, will be able to watch the legal drama unfold in real time.