In a writ petition filed before the Karnataka High Court regarding the CCTV coverage of an incident alleged to have taken place on 04-09-2024, a Single Judge Bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj directed a detailed enquiry regarding CCTV system in all police stations and establishments across the State.
It was submitted that the CCTV system at the Whitefield Police Station remained operational only when there was supply of electricity and that in case of a power failure, the CCTV system could function only if it was supported by the UPS, which had remained non-functional for eleven months, including the date on which the alleged incident was said to have occurred.
The Court stated that the Supreme Court, in Shafhi Mohammad v. State of Himachal Pradesh 2018 INSC 75, had directed CCTVs to be installed in all police stations after receipt of various complaints of atrocities being committed in police stations. It was said that the very purpose of installing CCTV cameras is defeated if the system is allowed to remain non-functional during power outages. The Court stated that if the UPS was defective, the SHO could not have remained a passive spectator twiddling his thumbs and that the supervisory officers at every higher level could not escape responsibility by adopting a similar approach.
It was stated that once it was brought to the notice of the authorities that the UPS was not functioning, it was incumbent upon every officer responsible to take immediate steps for repairing the same. The Court also perused a report showing details of the CCTV cameras and UPS systems and found several disturbing features. It was noted that under the column relative to the status of the UPS, the word ‘nil’ was used as if to indicate that all CCTV cameras were working 24×7, 365 days a year. The Court found it unclear as to whether the UPS dedicated to the CCTV system was independent of other electrical loads or whether it formed part of a common backup system serving the entire police station.
The Court said that the deficiencies raised serious concerns regarding the adequacy of the backup infrastructure and the effectiveness of the CCTV systems intended to ensure continuous surveillance. Asserting that the installation of a CCTV is not a mere formality, the Court stated that compliance with the Supreme Court’s directions is not confined to the physical installation, but extends to ensuring that the system remains continuously functional and capable of recording at all times. Hence, the Court directed the Additional Chief Secretary and Principal Secretary, Home Department as well as the Director General and Inspector General of Police to examine the matter personally and to ensure that a detailed enquiry is conducted.
The Court directed for a complete technical and administrative audit of the CCTV system in every police station across the State and to also enquire into the details regarding the power backup provided for the CCTV system, the electricity supply position, as well as the details of interruption in electricity supply on the date of the incident. The Court also directed the said authorities to direct the Police Computer Wing to design, develop, and implement a suitable State-level information technology system for monitoring the functioning of CCTV systems in all police stations.
The said authorities were given liberty to examine any other issue connected with the installation, maintenance, operation, monitoring, and preservation of CCTV systems in police stations so as to ensure full and effective compliance with the direction of the Supreme Court. It was stated that the object of the enquiry was not merely to identify lapses in the present case but to ensure that such lapses do not occur in any police station in the future. While extending the interim order, the Court re-listed the case on 09-09-2026.