No court has yet heard the case for mandatory, always-on body-worn cameras on police and RAF personnel deployed for crowd control, but a PIL in the Delhi High Court now asks for a binding regime.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
New Delhi: Seeking directions to the Union of India, Delhi Police and the Rapid Action Force, a public interest litigation in the Delhi High Court asks for a binding, enforceable body-worn camera regime for personnel engaged in protest-control and crowd-management duties [Chahat Raghav v. Union of India and Others].
Advocate Chahat Raghav filed the petition on October 6, 2026. It has not yet been heard, and the Court has passed no order on it.
What the petition asks for
The prayers include mandatory “always-on” activation of cameras, storage and integrity protocols with hash values and secure uploads, defined retention periods and chain-of-custody safeguards, and evidentiary certification under Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023.
The protests it points to
The petition refers to the July 2026 protests at Jantar Mantar involving the Cockroach Janta Party and climate activist Sonam Wangchuk, where allegations emerged of police use of force alongside claims of stone-pelting and vandalism. None of those allegations has been tested in this petition.
Why the petitioner wants a mandate
In the petitioner’s submission, the absence of a mandatory framework violates Articles 19(1)(a), 19(1)(b) and 21 of the Constitution, and reliance on “happenstance citizen videography” leaves accountability gaps. He says the 2020 advisory on body cameras was only recommendatory and had no enforcement mechanism. Authenticated footage, he contends, would document police-citizen interactions objectively, and the framework would protect “both sides of the barricade” without targeting protesters’ privacy.
Awaiting a response
The respondents’ stand is not yet on record, and no hearing date has been reported. How the Court responds will show whether a camera mandate for crowd-control duty is taken up by the judiciary, in a matter where the petitioner says footage would serve both protesters and police.
Case Title: Chahat Raghav v. Union of India and Others (PIL)
Court: Delhi High Court
Date of Filing: October 6, 2026
Respondents: Union of India, Delhi Police, Rapid Action Force