The Supreme Court strongly criticised the Centre and several States for not complying with its 2020 order mandating CCTV installation in all police stations, calling custodial deaths a serious “blot on the system”. The Court has granted three weeks for compliance, failing which senior officials will have to personally explain the delay.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has strongly criticised several States and the Union government for not following its 2020 order which made it compulsory to install CCTV cameras in all police stations across the country.
The Court said that the continued failure to implement this direction is a serious matter, especially in light of rising custodial deaths.
A Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta was hearing a suo motu case related to the absence of functional CCTV cameras in police stations.
This case was taken up after a newspaper report highlighted that 11 custodial deaths had taken place in Rajasthan within just eight months, even though the Supreme Court had earlier issued clear directions in the case of Paramvir Singh Saini v. Baljit Singh.
During the hearing, the Court made it clear that custodial deaths cannot be taken lightly and described the situation as unacceptable.
The Bench stated that custodial deaths were a “blot on the system” and further observed that the Union government seemed to be taking the Supreme Court “too lightly” as it had not even filed a compliance affidavit as directed earlier.
Justice Mehta began the proceedings by referring to the previous order of the Court which required all States and Union Territories to submit compliance affidavits showing that CCTV cameras with night vision and audio recording facilities had been installed in their police stations.
He expressed concern that many States had failed to respond.
Senior Advocate Siddhartha Dave, who was assisting the Court as Amicus Curiae, informed the Bench that only 11 States had complied with the directions so far. On this, Justice Mehta appreciated the efforts of Madhya Pradesh, calling it a model example of compliance.
He stated, “Madhya Pradesh’s work is remarkable,” and praised the State for ensuring proper installation and implementation of CCTV systems in police stations.
Dave supported this view and added, “Yes, Madhya Pradesh is the model State,” highlighting its commitment to following the Court’s directions.
However, the Bench questioned the silence and inaction of other States. Justice Mehta expressed surprise over Kerala’s failure to submit a report, especially considering its reputation for good administration.
He remarked,
“Why is Kerala shying away? It’s such an advanced state,”
showing disappointment at the lack of compliance from a State known for its efficiency.
The Court once again appreciated Madhya Pradesh for fully complying with the directions and for setting an example for other States in ensuring accountability and transparency in police functioning through CCTV surveillance.
The situation became more serious when it was pointed out that even the Union government had not filed its compliance affidavit. Justice Nath expressed strong displeasure, making it clear that the Central government cannot ignore or delay compliance with Supreme Court orders.
He observed,
“The Union is taking the Court very lightly. Why?”
questioning the Centre’s casual approach to a critical human rights issue.
Responding to this, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta assured the Court that the necessary affidavit would be filed, stating that he was not aware of the pending direction.
However, Justice Mehta clarified that the Court was not just looking for formal paperwork but actual ground-level implementation.
He firmly said,
“Not affidavit, compliance. There were 11 deaths in police stations in 8 months in Rajasthan. Custodial deaths. This will not be tolerated by the country. It is a blot on the system,”
underlining the seriousness of the issue and the need for immediate action.
The Bench also discussed the broader issue of prison reforms during the hearing. Justice Mehta suggested that open-air jails could play an important role in reducing overcrowding and improving rehabilitation of prisoners.
He observed,
“Open-air jails will solve the problem of overcrowding,”
highlighting the need for progressive correctional policies. Supporting this view, Justice Nath added,
“It will reduce financial burden also,”
stating that such measures would also ease the economic pressure on the State.
The Solicitor General requested three weeks’ time to ensure that all States and Union Territories submit their compliance affidavits. The Bench agreed to grant this extension.
In its formal order, the Court recorded that only 11 States have filed compliance affidavits so far. It granted three additional weeks to the remaining States and the Union government to submit their reports.
The Court also issued a strict warning, stating that if compliance is not shown by the next date of hearing, the Principal Secretaries of the Home Departments of the defaulting States will have to appear personally before the Court to explain the reasons for non-compliance.
The matter is now scheduled to be heard on December 16.
This case originates from the Supreme Court’s landmark 2020 judgment in Paramvir Singh Saini v. Baljit Singh, which made it mandatory for all States and Union Territories to install CCTV cameras with night vision and audio recording in every police station and also in the offices of central investigative agencies such as the CBI, NIA, ED, and NCB.
The Court had clearly stated that CCTV footage must be made available to victims in cases involving custodial violence or human rights violations to ensure transparency and accountability.
Despite these clear and binding directions, several States have still failed to fully implement them, prompting the Supreme Court to take a strict stand and demand immediate and genuine compliance to prevent further custodial deaths and restore public confidence in the justice system.
Click Here To Read More Reports on CCTV
