Today, On 26th September, The Supreme Court took suo motu cognizance of police custody deaths after 11 individuals died in Rajasthan. It has directed all States and Union Territories to submit detailed reports on CCTV installations and their functionality within three weeks.
The Supreme Court issued an order on Friday in a suo motu case regarding the absence of functional CCTV cameras in police stations across India.
Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta had taken notice of a news report on September 4, highlighting that 11 individuals had died in police custody in Rajasthan over the previous 7–8 months.
The Court mandated that all States and Union Territories provide detailed information on 12 key points within three weeks. This information includes the status of CCTV installations, their operational functionality, footage storage, and monitoring processes.
Additionally, the Court asked Senior Advocate Siddharth Dave to continue assisting with the case, which is scheduled for further discussion on October 14.
Earlier, On September 15, the Court had already reserved its orders in this suo motu case concerning custodial deaths and the lack of functional CCTV cameras in Rajasthan.
Senior Advocate Dave noted that while some states had complied with earlier directives regarding CCTV installations, many others had not.
He emphasized,
“The Union has not complied, neither NIA, nor ED, nor CBI,”
He also expressed concerns about custodial torture and abuse extending beyond just fatalities.
Justice Mehta remarked that the issue transcends mere compliance affidavits and calls for real-time oversight.
He pointed out,
“The issue is of oversight. Today there may be compliance affidavit, tomorrow officers may switch off cameras. We were thinking of a control room without human intervention. If any camera goes off, it should raise a flag. There has to be inspection of police stations by an independent agency. We can even think of involving IIT to provide a mechanism so that CCTV footage is monitored without human intervention.”
The Bench declined to entertain an intervenor, stating,
“If we require assistance, we will call you.”
The Court then directed that the matter be brought back for pronouncement on September 22.
Also Read: Woman’s Gotra Changes When She Marries: Supreme Court On Widow’s Property Rights
This suo motu public interest litigation (PIL) initiated on September 4 due to concerns regarding the lack of functional CCTV cameras in police stations nationwide, following reports of 11 custodial deaths in 2025.
The Bench took note of a Dainik Bhaskar report that highlighted the alarming increase in custodial deaths over the past several months.
Justice Nath noted,
“Based on Dainik Bhaskar, we are directing a suo motu PIL titled Lack of functional CCTVs in police stations, as 11 custodial deaths were reported in 2025 over the past 7–8 months.”
The Court’s intervention represents a significant move towards enforcing compliance with prior directives mandating the installation of CCTV systems in all police stations to ensure transparency and accountability.
The Dainik Bhaskar report indicated,
“There have been 11 deaths in police custody in the state within 8 months of 2025. 7 deaths have occurred in Udaipur division. In August, two bullion traders died in Kankroli police station of Rajsamand district and Rishabhdev police station of Udaipur district. Information was sought under RTI in all the cases.”
This development comes nearly five years after a landmark Supreme Court judgment in 2020, which mandated CCTV installation in all police stations across the country, as delivered by Justices Rohinton Fali Nariman, KM Joseph, and Aniruddha Bose.
That ruling also required the Union government to install CCTV systems in agencies like the CBI, NIA, ED, NCB, DRI, and SFIO, where interrogations of accused individuals occur.
The judgment further stipulated that all CCTV systems must be equipped with night vision and capable of both audio and video recording. It emphasized that victims of custodial violence or their families could approach Human Rights Courts to secure CCTV footage, ensuring accountability.
Despite these earlier directives, compliance has been inconsistent, with authorities often citing issues like non-functional cameras or missing footage when required to produce records related to custodial violence.
Case Title: In Re: Lack of Functional CCTVs in Police Stations