The move, which is understood to be announced in the Queen's Speech in May, will see television channels broadcasting the judge's verdicts
It is designed to aid the concept of "open justice" and demonstrate offenders are being punished, as well as allowing the public to engage with the justice system.
The move, first proposed in September last year and supported by David Cameron, has now been confirmed by the Ministry of Justice and is expected to come into play in May.
It is believed broadcasters will be initially granted strictly limited access, filming only the sentencing and judge's summing up at the end of cases.
They will not yet be allowed to film opening or closing statements by lawyers, the testimony of witnesses or verdicts.
It is due to be introduced in the Court of Appeal, before filtering down to Crown Court proceedings.
Kenneth Clarke, justice secretary, has said: "The Government and judiciary are determined to improve transparency and public understanding of court through allowing court broadcasting.
"We believe television has a role in increasing public confidence in the justice system."
A spokesman for the Ministry of Justice last night told the Independent newspaper: "Open justice is a longstanding and fundamental principle of our legal system.
"Justice must be done and be seen to be done if it is to command public confidence.
"The Government and judiciary are determined to improve transparency and public understanding of courts.
"That is why we announced in September that we are planning to remove the ban … as soon as parliamentary time allows."
The move follows a campaign by broadcasters, including the BBC, ITN and Sky News. In a joint letter, they said: "The ability to witness justice in action, in the public gallery, is a fundamental freedom. Television will make the public gallery open to all."
It is also supported by Keir Starmer, director of public prosecutions, who has previously suggested it would result in greater transparency in the justice system.
He said: "In principle I would support a proposal that judgments, judges' closing remarks and judicial sentencing in criminal cases could be televised.
"There may be a case for going further, although I would obviously not want to promote anything that adversely affected the ability of victims or witnesses to give their best evidence to the court.
"Therefore there would need to be appropriate safeguards, particularly in cases involving vulnerable individuals, and any requests to televise any part of the court process should be subject to the judge's individual discretion."
It is hoped the introduction of cameras will uphold the maxim of "justice must be done and must be seen to be done".
The development has previously been criticised by Attorney General Dominic Grieve QC, who said there was a "big question mark" over allowing cameras in courts.
As the issue was discussed in September, he warned: "The issue that then arises is, is this going to help public understanding or might it contribute to the whole thing being turned into a piece of theatre, which might also be undesirable?
"Clearly filming people actually being sentenced is likely to be undesirable as it would probably encourage theatricals."