CCTVs In Police Stations | Attorney General Assures Supreme Court Of Positive Steps In 2 Weeks

In the suo motu case concerning lack of functional CCTV cameras in police stations, Attorney General R Venkataramani today assured the Supreme Court that positive steps would be taken within 2 weeks.

Representing the Union Home Secretary, whose personal presence was directed by the Court yesterday, the AG said he has taken stock of the matter and will hold meetings with the Amicus Curiae (Senior Advocate Sidharth Dave), the Union Home Secretary and other concerned officers to resolve the issues.

A bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta heard the matter.

Yesterday, the Court had directed the personal presence of the Union Home Secretary to assist in issuing directions for effective monitoring of CCTV installations across States. During the hearing, the Amicus informed that while Kerala, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh had already established dashboard systems, other States, including Uttar Pradesh, are in the process of setting them up. The Court, upon hearing the submissions, questioned why other States were not adopting the "Kerala Model" of live monitoring.

Today, the bench again questioned as to why the Kerala model, which has been appreciated by the Amicus as the best available, cannot be adopted by other states, instead of each state developing its own software.

"Yesterday, it came out that Kerala has come out with a very nice software and implemented it fully. So we were requesting the ASG why can't you follow in all states instead of all states creating their own? According to Amicus, Kerala, MP and Rajasthan have already implemented and Kerala has the best (software)," Justice Nath said.

Justice Nath, in particular, also questioned the Union's representation by its Under Secretary in a meeting, when substantive steps are being taken by the top Court to tackle the issues. "[You must know] who to send for the meeting when the Supreme Court has constituted a Committee, appointed Amicus and has directed him to hold meetings with all States/UT...Under Secretary representing Union, does it look nice?", the judge conveyed to the AG.

The AG apologized for his absence on past few occasions and submitted that representation by the Under Secretary was not intended at belittling the importance of the meeting. He then assured that a meeting would be held by him within a week. The order passed recorded thus, "Pursuant to our orders, Home Secretary is present, represented by ld. AG. Upon instructions, ld. AG has stated that within 2 weeks, he will make sure all issues are sorted out by holding regular meetings with Amicus, Home Secretary...".

Background

On September 4, 2025, the Court called for registration of a suo motu case in the public interest with regard to the 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, 2025 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, 2025, an order was passed 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 a provision for surprise inspections and forensic validation of tamper-proofing.

On October 14, 2025, the Court questioned the Rajasthan government as to why there were no CCTV cameras in the interrogation rooms of its police stations. Further, the Court 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, as 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.

Case Details :

(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)