Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ritwik Kaushal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 June, 2021
Author: Atul Sreedharan
1 WP-8145-2021
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
WP-8145-2021
(RITWIK KAUSHAL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
4
Jabalpur, Dated : 14-06-2021
Heard through Video Conferencing.
Mr. Anurag Gohil, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr. Ritwik Parashar, learned Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.
Mr. Irshad Wali, DIG and Mr. Saikrishnan, Superintendent of Police,
Bhopal have joined this Court through video conferencing from AG office.
Pursuant to the order dated 11.06.2021, the Superintendent of Police,
South Bhopal and the Deputy Inspector General Bhopal (Urban) have joined
the proceeding today. Inter alia, the Superintendent of Police has stated that
the cameras installed at PS Piplani were functional till 22.02.2021. The AMC
for the same had expired on 24.07.2019. He has also stated that after the
expiry of the AMC a fresh AMC is yet to be issued and there are cameras
which are disfunctional in 14 other Thanas under his jurisdiction besides PS
Piplani. He has stated that the AMC has to be issued from the
Telicommunications Department, which is responsible for making the
budgetary allocations.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed before this Court the
order passed by the Supreme Court on 02.12.2020 in Paramvir Singh Saini
Vs Baljit Singh and others-2021 (1) SCC 184, where a three Judge Bench
of the Supreme Court had passed interim directions. In the said order, the
Supreme Court has directed that the Oversight Committees at the State and
District levels are to be constituted in accordance with the order passed by
the Supreme Court on 03.04.2018.
The State Level Oversight Committee is to consist of the
Secretary/Additional Secretary, Home Department, the Secretary/Additional
Secretary Finance Department, the Director General/Inspector General of
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Police and the Chairperson/Member of State Women's Commission. In
Digitally signed by SHYAMLEE SINGH
SOLANKI
Date: 2021.06.15 18:05:04 IST
2 WP-8145-2021
paragraph 11, the Supreme Court directed that the District Level Oversight
Committee shall be comprised of the Divisional Commissioner, District
Magistrate, Superintendent of Police and a Mayor of the Municipality within
the district, or Head of the Zila Panchayat in Rural areas. In paragraph 12, the
Supreme Court directed that it shall be the duty of State Level Oversight
Committee to ensure that the directions passed by the Supreme Court are
enforced and amongst its duties were purchase, distribution and installation of
CCTVs and its equipment, obtaining the budgetary allocation for the same,
continuous monitoring of maintenance and upkeep of CCTVs and its
equipments, carrying out inspections and addressing the grievances received
from the District Level Oversight Committee and call for monthly reports of
the District Level Oversight Committee and immediately address any
concerns like faulty equipment.
The Supreme Court also directed that the District Level Oversight
Committee shall have the obligation of supervision, maintenance and upkeep
of CCTV and its equipment, continuous monitoring and of maintenance and
upkeep of CCTVs and its equipments, to interact with the Station House
Officer as to functioning and maintenance of the CCTVs and its equipment,
send monthly reports to the State Level Oversight Committee about the
functioning of the CCTVs and allied equipment and review footage stored
from CCTVs in the various Police Stations to check for any human rights
violation that may have occurred, but are not reported.
In paragraph 13, the Supreme Court voiced its opinion that none of the
above can be done without allocations of adequate funds, which must be
done by the Finance Departments of the States at the earliest. In paragraph
14, the Supreme Court has fixed the responsibility and the working,
maintenance and recording of CCTVs on the SHO of the Police Station
concerned who was to, immediately report to that District Level Oversight
Committee any fault with the equipment or malfunctioning of CCTVs and the
District Level of Oversight Committee shall immediately request the State
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by SHYAMLEE SINGH
SOLANKI
Date: 2021.06.15 18:05:04 IST
3 WP-8145-2021
Level Oversight Committee for repair and purchase of equipments which shall
be done immediately.
In paragraph 15, the Supreme Court directed that the Director General
of Police of each state should issue directions to the person in charge of a
Police Station to entrust the SHO of the Police Station concerned with the
responsibility of assessing the working condition of the CCTV cameras
installed in the Police Station and also take corrective actions to restore the
functioning of all non-functional CCTV cameras. The SHO should also be
made responsible for CCTV data maintenance, backup data and fault
rectification.
In paragraph 21 of the Supreme Court's order, the Supreme Court
directed that the State Level Oversight Committee shall give directions to all
Police Stations and Law Enforcement Agencies to prominently display at the
entrance and inside the Police Stations/ Offices of Investigator/Enforcement
agencies about the coverage of the premises by CCTV. It also directed that
this information shall be prominently given by large posters in English, Hindi
and vernacular language (where applicable). In addition, the poster must also
mention that a person has a right to complain about human rights violation to
the National/State Human Rights Commission, Human Rights Court or
Superintendent of Police or any other authority empower to take cognizance
of an offence. The poster shall further mention that the CCTV footage shall
be preserved for a minimum period of time which shall not be less than six
months and that the victim has a right to secure the same in the event of
violation of his human rights.
The Superintendent of Police, Bhopal (South), shall file an affidavit
with regard to the failure of CCTV cameras at Police Station Piplani. The
respondent No.5-the Station House Officer of Police Station Piplani, Bhopal
shall also file a separate affidavit with regard to the failure of the CCTV
cameras in his Police Station, the date on which he came to know and the
action taken by him. The respondent No.2 Director General of Police shall
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by SHYAMLEE SINGH
SOLANKI
Date: 2021.06.15 18:05:04 IST
4 WP-8145-2021
also file an affidavit with regard to the extent of compliance of the order
passed by the Supreme Court in Paramvir Singh Saini Vs Baljit Singh
and others -2021 (1) SCC 184, with specific focus on paragraph 10 to 21
of the said judgment. Let this be done on or before the next date of hearing.
List on Top of the list on 28.06.2021.
(ATUL SREEDHARAN)
JUDGE
pnm
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by SHYAMLEE SINGH
SOLANKI
Date: 2021.06.15 18:05:04 IST
