A Division Bench of Chief Justice M.S. Sonak and Justice Manoj Prasad was considering the issue of installation of CCTV cameras in police stations across Jharkhand.

Pursuant to the Court's order dated 27.08.2026, the Director General of Police (DGP) filed an affidavit on 11.09.2026. The affidavit stated that the DGP did not have the authority to issue independent and separate directions for installation of CCTV cameras in police stations and that the Home, Prison and Disaster Management Department was the competent department to take the appropriate decision.

The Court observed that, at this belated stage, the DGP appeared to be seeking to “abdicate all responsibility” for compliance with the Court's orders regarding installation of CCTV cameras.

The Bench referred to an earlier PIL, W.P.(PIL) No.1218 of 2022, concerning custodial deaths in Jharkhand. The State's own data, restricted to the period from 2018 onwards, showed 427 custodial deaths. The Court recorded that it was “shocked beyond words” at the figure of 427 custodial deaths between 2018 and 2026.

Despite this, the Court noted that judicial directions regarding CCTV cameras continued to be flouted. The Bench observed that the State appeared to follow a recurring pattern: tenders would be invited, followed by explanations regarding difficulties in the tender process, and ultimately the tenders would be cancelled, with a fresh proposal promised.

The Court noted that coordinate Benches had already taken cognisance of this pattern and found it to be a “time-tested modus operandi to defy the Court's orders or to delay implementation to the extent possible.” The Court further observed:

“At least prima facie, through such bureaucratic red tape, the State has, up to now, successfully delayed the implementation of the Court's orders, if not altogether refusing to comply with them.”

The Bench also criticised the repeated affidavits tendering “unqualified and unconditional apologies”, observing that such assurances “ring quite hollow” when considered against the circumstances of the case. The Court observed:

“At least in a State where the official records admit to about 427 custodial deaths during the short period between 2018 and 2026, there should have been no delay in complying with the Court's orders to install CCTV cameras in all the police stations.”

The Court accordingly recorded that it had, at least prima facie, formed the impression of a “systematic effort to delay, if not outright disobedience.”

Since the DGP's affidavit had effectively apportioned responsibility to the Additional Chief Secretary, Home, Prison and Disaster Management Department, the Court issued notice to the Additional Chief Secretary, Ms. Vandana Dhadel, requiring her to show cause why action under the Contempt of Courts Act should not be initiated against her.

The Court directed that she may file her affidavit, if she so desired, by 14.10.2026. The Bench also directed that notice in Form-I be served personally upon the DGP within ten days, along with the petition, annexures, affidavits and previous orders passed in the matter.

The Advocate General sought time until 14.10.2026 to indicate the timeline within which CCTV installation in all police stations would be completed.

The Court directed the Chief Secretary of Jharkhand to assume responsibility in the matter and file an affidavit indicating the timeline. It made clear that an affidavit from JAP-IT or any contractor would not be acceptable.

The matter has been listed for 15.10.2026.

Appearance:

For the Petitioner: Mr. Ritesh Kumar Mahto, Amicus Curiae

For the Respondent-State: Mr. Rohitashya Roy, AG; Mr. Vibhor Mayank, AC to AG

For the Private Respondents: Mr. S.L. Agrawal, Advocate; Ms. Ayushi, Advocate