Summary
To protect Article 21 rights, the Court directed comprehensive audio-video CCTV coverage of police stations and offices of central agencies exercising arrest and interrogation powers. It prescribed State, district and central oversight, SHO responsibility, funding and maintenance, footage preservation and public notice of complaint rights. Detailed compliance affidavits and firm implementation timelines were required within six weeks; the matter remained pending for monitoring.
Issues
- What CCTV coverage, recording, preservation and oversight safeguards must protect persons in police and investigative custody.
- What complaint, public-notice and reporting arrangements are necessary to make the safeguards effective.
Provisions considered
- Article 21, Constitution of IndiaIssued binding operational and compliance directions to secure custodial safeguards as a measure protecting fundamental rights. (¶¶ 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21)
Held
- State and district oversight committees with the specified administrative, police and representative membership were to oversee procurement, funding, functioning and maintenance. District committees were to report monthly and review footage for unreported human-rights violations. Adequate funds were to be provided at the earliest. (¶¶ 10, 11, 12, 13)
- The SHO was responsible for operation, recording, backups and fault reporting. During camera failure, arrest and interrogation records had to be forwarded to the district committee, with prompt steps for repair and replacement. (¶¶ 14, 15)
- Every police station required comprehensive coverage of the specified spaces, including entrances, exits, lockups, corridors, officials’ rooms and outside washrooms, with night vision and both audio and video. Electricity, connectivity and clear recordings were to be ensured. (¶¶ 16, 17)
- Recording systems were to preserve footage for 18 months. If such equipment was unavailable, the longest commercially available retention was mandatory and could not be below one year, with review to obtain 18-month equipment when available. Compliance affidavits had to confirm purchase of the best available equipment. (¶ 17)
- Complaints of force causing serious injury or custodial death could be taken to Human Rights Commissions and district Human Rights Courts. The relevant authority could promptly summon and safeguard footage and make it available for investigation. District Human Rights Courts were to be established as directed. (¶ 18)
- The Union was to report on the Central Oversight Body and ensure corresponding CCTV coverage in CBI, NIA, ED, NCB, DRI, SFIO and other arrest-capable agencies’ offices where interrogation and holding of accused occur. The central body was assigned the corresponding oversight role. (¶ 19)
- Prominent notices in English, Hindi and the vernacular were to disclose CCTV coverage and complaint routes, and state the right to secure footage. The separate notice direction specified a preservation period not less than six months; the equipment-preservation requirements were set out in paragraph 17. (¶¶ 17, 20)
- States and Union Territories had to file detailed compliance affidavits and firm action plans with exact timelines within six weeks. Implementation was required in letter and spirit as soon as possible; registry was to communicate the order that day and the matter was listed for further monitoring. (¶¶ 8, 9, 21, 23, 24)
Result
Continuing CCTV, oversight, preservation and compliance directions issued; affidavits and action plans due within six weeks. Registry directed to circulate the order immediately; listed for 27 January 2021.