P&H High Court Flags 'Mechanical Approach' In Monitoring CCTV Compliance At Police Stations
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has raised serious concerns over the functioning of oversight mechanisms meant to ensure installation and monitoring of CCTV cameras in police stations, flagging a “mechanical approach” adopted by authorities that defeats the very purpose of such committees.Justice Vinod S.Bhardwaj said, "Counsel for both the State of Punjab and Haryana and the counsel...
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has raised serious concerns over the functioning of oversight mechanisms meant to ensure installation and monitoring of CCTV cameras in police stations, flagging a “mechanical approach” adopted by authorities that defeats the very purpose of such committees.
Justice Vinod S.Bhardwaj said, "Counsel for both the State of Punjab and Haryana and the counsel for U.T. pray for time to file a comprehensive list of instructions that have been issued by the Central Oversight Body as well as the SLOC for compliance by the various DLOCs and the detailed analysis of the data that has been collected by the SLOC over a period of time from the date of being furnished by different DLOCs and as to what discrepancies/shortages have ever been noticed by them over a period of last 05 years."
The Court noted that while monthly reports are being submitted by police stations, there appears to be little clarity on whether any meaningful inspection or verification is carried out. The Court observed that merely compiling reports “in bulk volumes” without real monitoring undermines the object behind the constitution of District and State Level Oversight Committees.
During the hearing, the Deputy Commissioner, Patiala, informed the Court that monthly reports are received and forwarded, but was unable to explain what checks or random inspections are undertaken thereafter. The Court found this lack of accountability concerning, particularly in light of repeated claims before courts about non-availability or malfunctioning of CCTV footage.
Relying on Supreme Court judgments in Shafhi Mohammad v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Paramvir Singh Saini v. Baljit Singh, the Amicus Curiae Senior Advocate Kshitij Sharma pointed out gaps in implementation, including the absence of publicly available directions issued by the Central Oversight Body over the past several years. It was further highlighted that despite judicial mandates, there is little evidence of active monitoring of CCTV footage to detect human rights violations.
"I am of the opinion that the issue being of vital significance and the Hon'ble Supreme Court emphasizing the need for ensuring that CCTV cameras are not only installed but the CCTV footages are also stored for a minimum period of 06 months, it is apposite to call for a response from the SLOC not only from the State of Punjab but also from the State of Haryana as well as U.T. Chandigarh," the Court observed.
Mr. Mohit Kapoor, Sr.DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Kshitij Sharma, Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Gurpreet K. Bhatti, Advocate as Amicus curiae.
Mr. Himanshu Aggarwal, Deputy Commissioner, Patiala (through V.C.). Inspector Gurpreet Singh, S.H.O. Police Station Urban Estate, District Patiala in person.