New Delhi: The Supreme Court has initiated suo motu proceedings over non-functional CCTV systems in police stations, following reports of 11 custodial deaths in Rajasthan within eight months. A Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta stressed accountability and ordered urgent follow-up action.
Court Flags Alarming Custodial Deaths
The matter arose after a news report revealed that 11 people died in police custody in Rajasthan in 2025, with seven cases from Udaipur division alone. Recording this in its September 4 order, the Bench termed the revelations disturbing.
The judges observed, “We have come across a disturbing news article. It reveals that there have been 11 deaths in police custody in Rajasthan in 2025, seven in the Udaipur Division alone.”
Systemic CCTV Lapses Noted
The report also highlighted that remand rooms often fall outside CCTV coverage. Police frequently cite technical faults, lack of storage, or ongoing investigations to withhold footage. In some instances, officers have refused or delayed sharing recordings altogether.
Taking cognizance, the Court ordered, “We take suo motu cognizance of the aforesaid news article under the heading In Re: Lack of functional CCTVs in Police Stations and direct the Registry to place these proceedings before the Chief Justice of India for appropriate action.”
Earlier Directives Ignored
The apex court had earlier mandated CCTV installation across all police stations to ensure transparency and prevent custodial torture. It directed that no area of a police station be left uncovered, and that footage be stored for at least 18 months in digital or network recorders.
In 2023, the Court had even given the Centre and states a “last chance” to comply within three months. It also fixed personal responsibility on Station House Officers (SHOs) for maintenance, repair, and data backup of CCTV systems.
Judiciary Stresses Accountability
By taking suo motu action, the Supreme Court reaffirmed its concern over recurring custodial deaths and systemic lapses in monitoring. The ruling underscores the judiciary’s commitment to accountability and transparency in law enforcement.
