'Why No CCTVs In Interrogation Rooms Of Police Stations?': Supreme Court Asks Rajasthan Govt; Seeks Response On 11 Custody Deaths

The Supreme Court today questioned the Rajasthan government as to why there are no CCTV cameras in the interrogation rooms of its police stations.Taking note of an affidavit filed by the state in a suo motu case initiated over lack of functional CCTVs in its police stations, Justice Sandeep Mehta remarked, "one very interesting feature in this affidavit - there is no camera in the interrogation room. Any of the police stations. There's no camera in the interrogation room which is the main place where camera has to be there. What you're doing in the interrogation room is the most relevant!".A bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Mehta asked the State of Rajasthan to come back with a proposal for maintaining oversight on CCTV surveillance of police stations. It was orally observed that the same may entail monetary burden, but that should not be a problem, as it is a matter of human rights.Further, the bench called on the state to explain its stance on the 11 deaths stated to have occurred in police custody over the past 8-9 months. Justice Mehta also emphasized that the police station camera feeds have to go to some centralized agency, like footage of CCTVs installed on roads goes to command centres in Rajasthan, so that if a camera goes off, someone is notified and remedial steps are immediately taken.During the hearing, Senior Advocate Siddharth Dave (Amicus) pointed out that as per Paramvir Singh Saini directions, CCTV cameras have to be installed everywhere in a police station except near washrooms. He also highlighted that the Union, 16 states and 3 Union Territories are yet to comply with the Court's directions in Paramvir Singh Saini.In response, the bench assured that it will ensure compliance with the directions in due time.To Rajasthan government's counsel, Justice Mehta posed, "What is the mechanism for oversight? SHO takes care of the oversight, as per your affidavit?"When the counsel said that there is a nodal officer, Justice Mehta asked, "he goes physically to the police station to check? Why can't the feed be provided to a particular dashboard which has monitoring mechanism?"The judge gave two examples - one, of how taxation system is enabled by Infosys, and second, how passport services are enabled by Tata Services. "Why can't such an agency be involved to ensure that the entire feed...all should be collated in a single server so that there is possibility of retrieval if required..." Justice Mehta opined.The matter was ultimately re-listed to enable the Union and the States to respond to the Amicus' report, as well as for the State of Rajasthan to file a response to the Court's observations.To recap, on September 4, the Court called for registration of a suo motu case in public interest with regard to lack of functional CCTV cameras in police stations. A bench of Justices Nath and Mehta took the action based on a report published by Dainik Bhaskar, as per which around 11 people died in police custody in the last seven to eight months this year.Prior to that, in December 2020, the Court had mandated in Paramvir Singh Saini v. Baljit Singh that all State and Union Territory Governments should ensure that CCTV cameras are installed in each and every police station functioning under them. However, compliance remained patchy, with many cameras either not installed or lying defunct.On September 15, the Court expressed in the suo motu case that it was considering independent monitoring of the CCTV cameras in police stations without any human intervention, as even if CCTVs are installed in compliance with the Court's earlier directions, the same can be switched off by officials.On September 26, it passed an order putting 12 queries to the State of Rajasthan, including whether regular audits are carried out to ensure the functioning of CCTVs. The Court further asked the government to state the period for which CCTV footage of police stations is preserved. It also questioned whether there is provision for surprise inspections and forensic validation of tamper proofing.Case Title: (1) IN RE LACK OF FUNCTIONAL CCTVS IN POLICE STATIONS Versus, SMW(C) No. 7/2025(2) PARAMVIR SINGH SAINI Versus BALJIT SINGH, SLP (Crl) No.3543/2020 (and connected cases)Click Here To Read/Download Order

'Why No CCTVs In Interrogation Rooms Of Police Stations?': Supreme Court Asks Rajasthan Govt; Seeks Response On 11 Custody Deaths

Debby Jain

"Interrogation room is the main place where camera has to be there. What you're doing there is most relevant", said Justice Sandeep Mehta.

Tags