Entire Police Station Including Interrogation Rooms Need To Be Under CCTV Coverage As Per SC's Order: High Court To Punjab, Haryana DGPs

The Bench of Justice Amol Rattan Singh observed thus as it sought the response of DGP, Haryana, the DGP, Punjab, as also the DGP, U.T., Chandigarh regarding the compliance of the Supreme Court's order in Paramvir Singh Saini v. Baljit Singh and others (2021) 1 SCC 184

Here it may be noted that in Paramvir Singh Sain's case, the Supreme Court had observed that the State and Union Territory Governments should ensure that CCTV cameras are installed in each and every Police Station functioning under them.

The case before the High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court last month asked the Director-General of Police (DGPs) of Punjab and Haryana State as to why the court should, not in appropriate cases, direct that interrogation of the accused be conducted under videography so as to eradicate the chances of the accused being tortured by the police.

The Bench of Justice Amol Rattan Singh had raised this query while hearing a plea from Kaushal, an alleged gangster, who has been named as an accused in the gruesome murder of Youth Akal Dal leader Vikramjit Middukhera.

Essentially, Kaushal has, in his plea had alleged that he has been tortured at the hands of police officials, while he was interrogated by them and therefore, he has demanded that appropriate measures be taken for the videography of his police interrogation.

Response of Haryana, Punjab DGPs

Pursuant to the Court's order, as regards video recording of investigation of the interrogation process, the DGP, Haryana, in his report stated that there is no such provision in the Cr.P.C. for conducting an investigation under the surveillance of CCTV cameras.

On the other hand, the DGP, Punjab, was conspicuously silent in his affidavit on that aspect.

However, it was stated that CCTV cameras have been installed in all entry and exit gates of prisons and all police stations. It is to be noticed that such cameras were also installed by both the States on directions issued by the Supreme Court and the High court.

Court's observations

Responding to the contention of DGP Haryana that no such law exists to bring interrogation rooms under the CCTV Coverage, the Court, referring to the SC's order (cited above), observed thus:

"As per Article 142 of the Constitution of India, the Supreme Court, in the exercise of its jurisdiction, may pass such decree or order as is necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter pending before it, and any order or decree so passed would be enforceable throughout the territory of India. Further, the law declared by the Supreme Court would be binding on all courts as per Article 141."

In this regard, the Court said that as per the SC's directions, interrogation rooms are to be covered under CCTV surveillance, and therefore the DGP, Haryana, the DGP, Punjab, as also the DGP, U.T., Chandigarh, have been directed to file affidavits as to whether the aforesaid directions of the Supreme Court have been complied with or not.

"Consequently, and obviously, non-compliance of the directions issued by the Supreme Court in Paramvir Singh Sainis' case, would amount to contempt of Court and this court would, naturally, also be bound to ensure that the directions issued by the Supreme Court are actually carried out at ground level by the States and Union Territory falling within the jurisdiction of this court. Hence, the aforesaid direction to the DGPs," the Court further added.

Lastly and importantly, the Court also directed that not just in the case of the present petitioner, but in the case of every person who is in police custody or is being taken into police custody, all provisions of the Cr.P.C., including Section 41-B, 41-C, 41-D and 54, 55 and 55-A would be meticulously followed, with compliance reports in that regard to be made a part of the report under Section 173 of the Cr.P.C., as regards even medical examination necessary to be conducted in terms of Section 55-A thereof.

Senior Advocate Bipan Ghai along with Advocates Paras Talwar appeared for the petitioner. 

Case title - Kaushal v. State of Haryana and others

Click Here To Read/Download Order