PIL in Delhi High Court opposes LG’s move permitting Police Depositions via video from stations

A public interest litigation (PIL) has been instituted before the Delhi High Court assailing a notification issued by the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi, VK Saxena, which designates all police stations in the capital as authorized venues for recording the deposition of police officials through video conferencing.

The petition, filed by Advocate Kapil Madan through Advocates Gurmukh Singh Arora and Ayushi Bisht, contends that the notification directly undermines the right to a fair trial guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It is argued that permitting prosecution witnesses, particularly police officials, to depose from within their own stations strikes at the core of judicial impartiality, erodes the solemnity of proceedings, and disproportionately strengthens the prosecution.

According to the plea, testimony given in the official precincts of a police station, in the presence of colleagues and superiors, cannot be equated to deposition before a judicial officer in an open courtroom. The arrangement, it is urged, inevitably invites the risk of subtle departmental influence, coercion, tutoring, or reliance upon official records while testifying.

The petitioner further submits that the impugned notification runs contrary to Section 308 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which mandates that evidence be recorded in the presence of the accused and under the supervision of the Presiding Judge. Allowing police officers to depose from their own workplaces, the plea argues, compromises the safeguards of due process, exposes proceedings to the dangers of witness tampering, and disrupts the integrity of the evidentiary chain.

It has also been highlighted that in circumstances where a witness is required to be confronted with physical exhibits, the credibility of such evidence may be fatally compromised if the testimony is rendered outside judicial scrutiny. This, according to the petitioner, opens avenues for systemic manipulation and corrodes public faith in the criminal justice system.

“The petitioner, being a practicing advocate, has personally observed the fragile balance of justice in criminal trials. By enabling prosecution witnesses to depose from their own institutions, the impugned notification irreversibly tilts this balance, gravely prejudicing the rights of the accused and eroding confidence in fair trial guarantees,” the petition asserts.