Supreme Court takes Suo Moto PIL action on the lack of CCTVs in Police Station

Introduction: 

A media reporter highlighted the lack of functional CCTV cameras in police stations across the country; after taking this into consideration, the Supreme Court directed the registration of Suo Moto Public Interest Litigation (PIL). 

Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta, a bench of two, heard this matter and showed serious concerns about rising custodial deaths.

Supreme Court takes Suo Moto PIL action on lack of CCTVs in police stations.

Why did this court step in?

Around 11 custodial deaths have taken place in the last seven to eight years, according to a media report. The bench referred to the said report stated by the media. Such incidents raise serious human rights issues; the court stated that:

“We are directing the registration of a Suo motu public interest litigation titled ‘Lack of functional CCTVs in police stations".

This direction comes in the backdrop of earlier rulings where the Apex Court had already stressed the importance of installing surveillance cameras in police stations and investigation agency offices to check human rights violations and ensure transparency in police functioning.

Previous directions of the Supreme Court

There are previous directions for this issue: 

1. 2018 – For restricting the custodial torture and abuse, the Supreme Court had ordered that CCTV cameras must be installed in all police stations. 

2. December 2020 - The court, extending its mandate, insisted the offices of investigating agencies such as the CBI, National Investigation Agency (NIA), and Enforcement Directorate (ED) install CCTV Cameras and recording equipment. 

The court specified that cameras must cover all the entry and exit points, lockups, main gates, lobbies, corridors, areas outside the lockup rooms and reception, leaving no blind spot. 

Adding to this, the court directed that:

• Night vision cameras shall be installed.

• Both audio and video recording facilities must be installed.

• The data must be stored for one year.

• The Centre, the state and the union territories were made responsible for maintaining and purchasing such systems.

Significance of the issue

There is a serious gap between orders and implementations, as highlighted by the Supreme Court’s intervention. Many states and union territories have failed to comply, despite clear directions in 2018 and 2020.  

The lack of functional CCTVs not only undermines accountability but also makes it difficult to investigate allegations of:

• Death in police custody. 

• Ill-treatment and torture of the accused person. 

• Illegal detention. 

CCTVs serve as a deterrent to police misconduct and safeguard honest officers by offering impartial evidence of events occurring within the police station.

What happens next, Suo Moto PIL?

Registering this Suo Moto PIL, the Supreme Court is likely to: 

• Seek responses on the status of compliance with its earlier orders from the Centre, all States and Union Territories. 

• Oversee the installation and operational status of the CCTV system in the investigation offices and police stations. 

• Establish deadlines or accountability steps to guarantee complete adherence. 

Way forward: 

The repeated failure of the authorities to comply with the judicial directions aimed at protecting human rights made the court take necessary measures.  

The Supreme Court gestured that preventing custodial deaths and ensuring transparency in police functioning will remain a matter of constitutional precedence by converting the issue into a Suo Moto PIL. 

Empower Your Legal Practice with AI – Join Our Free Webinar!

Are you a legal professional looking to boost your efficiency and stay ahead in a competitive field? Discover the power of Lawttorney.AI – the cutting-edge tool designed to streamline legal research, automate tasks, and enhance productivity.

👉 Don't miss out! Reserve your spot in our FREE webinar and experience the future of legal practice today. Register Now