'Police Nowadays Relies On Digital Information, CCTV Footages But Shies Of Divulging Details When Comes To Their Own Working': MP HC Grants Bail In NDPS Case
Finding contradiction in police's version in respect of CCTV cameras installed inside the police station, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has granted bail to an accused in connection with a NDPS case while observing that while the police nowadays relies on the use of CCTV footages and digital information, it shies of divulging details when it comes to their own functioning. A single judge...
Finding contradiction in police's version in respect of CCTV cameras installed inside the police station, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has granted bail to an accused in connection with a NDPS case while observing that while the police nowadays relies on the use of CCTV footages and digital information, it shies of divulging details when it comes to their own functioning.
A single judge bench comprising of Justice Subodh Abhyankar observed thus:
"It is rather interesting to note that due to technical advancement, the police, nowadays relies heavily upon the digital information viz., tower locations, call details, cctv footages, whatspp chats, emails etc. to connect the accused persons with the offence, but when it comes to their own working, it shies of from divulging the details, and that is done only when you have something to hide."
An application seeking bail was filed by the accused in an FIR registered under Section 8, 22 and 29 of the NDPS Act. The applicant was in custody since 8th December last year after being allegedly found in possession of 50 grams of drug along with another co accused.
The co accused was granted bail by the Court taking note of the CCTV footage furnished by him to show that he wasn't present on the spot of the incident.
Similar was the case of the applicant who claimed that was not arrested from the alleged spot but was rather called to the police inside the police station, falsely implicated in the case and was then arrested.
It was also submitted that he had applied for obtaining CCTV footage of the concerned Police station under Section 91 of CrPC, however, he was informed that the footage cannot be provided since it is saved only for a period of 6-7 days and the same was deleted.
However, it was the case of the petitioner that the stand of the police was different in another case wherein it was stated with respect to CCTV footage of the same date that the cameras installed in the Police station are not working.
Observing the facts of the case, the Court observed thus:
"Under such facts and circumstances of the case, when the police has two diametrically opposite stands in respect of the CCTV camera installed in the police station and same is also contrary to the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the case of Paramvir Singh (supra), in the considered opinion of this Court, the applicant's application deserves to be allowed by giving him the benefit of doubt."
With the said observations, the Court granted bail to the applicant on a personal bail bond in the sum of Rs. 1 Lakh with one surety of like amount.
In a recent ruling, the Madhya Pradesh High Court had taken a prima facie view that in order to escape liability, the Police often take a false stand that the CCTVs installed at Police station are not functioning.
It had observed that such a stand taken by the Police does not augur well for the ordinary citizens of the State as it creates an environment of giving an opportunity to the Police to act with impunity in complete disregard to human rights and personal liberty and enables them to detain anyone in the police station and conveniently give an explanation that the CCTV cameras were disfunctional during the period which the citizen says that he was unlawfully detained in the police station.
Title: Vicky S/o Jaipaldas Pariyani Vs. State of M.P