By Sanjeev Kumar Patro
Bhubaneswar: Close on the heels of Bharatpur PS custodial horror in Odisha, where an Army Major and his fiancé were detained without valid reasons and were also subjugated to torture in custody, the Madhya Pradesh High Court today delivered a judgment asking the State to provide the cops with body cam.
Delivering his judgment on a Miscellaneous criminal case Nirmal Vs the State of Madhya Pradesh, Justice Subodh Abhayankar ruled that the court is also of the considered opinion that the time has come when the State Government should also give a thought to providing body cameras to police personnel, at least to the police force of some of the police stations in major cities.
WHY MP HC SAID SO?
While allowing the bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.1973, for offences under various sections of the Narcotic Drugs Psychotropic Substance Act, owing to serious lapses on the part of the concerned police station at Manasa to furnish CCTV footage to the applicant whose contention was that he was arrested prior in time and a false case has been slapped on him subsequently, Justice Subodh Abhyankar enquired into the current practice adopted by the police to maintain the CCTV cameras installed in the police stations.
Exactly, this is what the Orissa High Court had recently asked the Odisha Police ADG (Modernisation) to submit in detail the number of CCTVs installed in the police stations, the SOP regarding installation of CCTVs in the State, and the recordings.
While perusing the District Police report on following the SOP for CCTV as laid down by the Supreme Court, the MP High Court has made the following observations.
- On perusal of the aforesaid SOP, and the documents filed on record, this Court is of the considered opinion that although the respondents have tried to comply with the order passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Paramvir Singh Saini, however, all these hardware installed, and SOPs issued for the proper maintenance of the same are meaningless if they are not properly implemented by the officers concerned in the letter and spirit of the order passed by the Supreme Court.
- The court further observed that It was found that the SOP does not provide for any penal consequences, if they are not adhered to by the concerned officers of the police station.
- As per the SOP, punitive /statutory action is mandated against a police officer, who tries to delete the recordings, indulges in theft of hard disk or making the equipment non-functional.
- But the court rule that the aforesaid proposed disciplinary action, in the considered opinion of this court, is a mere eye wash and totally inadequate to make any impact on the police officer concerned
- The court then ruled in case of any failure to provide the CCTV footage to any person by any police official or by SHO of the concerned police station, a departmental enquiry be invariably be initiated against him/them in accordance with law, and if found guilty, it should be treated as a major misconduct, and punished accordingly.
- After expressing displeasure over Police department’s ambiguity in adhering to the SC norms, Justice Abhayankar then made his observation on record about the need to equip cops with body cameras.
- The court asked the registrar to send the judgment copy to DGP of Madhya Pradesh.
