The Crossbill Team
The Allahabad High Court has ordered the immediate release of a Muslim man allegedly detained unlawfully by the Uttar Pradesh Police, while imposing a cost of Rs 20,000 on the state government.
Taking serious note of the repeated failure of police stations to produce CCTV recordings, the court observed that “the civil liberties situation in the state is shameful, to say the least”.
The court also made it clear that the police cannot rely on claims of CCTV malfunction to evade scrutiny in cases involving allegations of illegal detention.
According to Live Law, a division bench comprising Justices Atul Sreedharan and Achal Sachdev said the police appeared to have “little regard” for the fundamental rights and civil liberties of citizens. The bench further observed that violations of these rights seemed to have become routine within the Uttar Pradesh Police.
The observations came while hearing a habeas corpus petition filed by Afzal Ahmad's daughter. She alleged that her father was taken into custody by the Bijnor Police on September 5, 2026, but his formal arrest was recorded only on September 7, two days later.
The court directed the authorities to release Ahmad forthwith and ordered the Adityanath government to pay Rs 20,000 in costs to him within seven days.
According to the petition, Ahmad and his daughter had gone to the police station after being summoned by the police. At around 2.30 pm on September 5, while they were sitting in their vehicle and had contacted the station house officer (SHO), another car entered the premises near the police station gate. Four persons, allegedly police personnel and Special Operations Group (SOG) officials in plain clothes, got out, surrounded their vehicle and forcibly took Ahmad away.
Seeking to establish the circumstances of his disappearance, the high court had earlier directed the state government to produce CCTV footage from the police station covering the period between 1 pm on September 5 and 10 am on September 7.
However, the state informed the court that the recordings were unavailable. It cited a general diary entry dated September 5, which claimed that a thunderstorm had caused water to seep through a LAN cable into the CCTV system, resulting in its malfunction, Live Law reported.
The explanation failed to convince the bench, which highlighted the recurring inability of police authorities to produce CCTV footage whenever sought by the court.
“In case after case whenever CCTV footages are called for by this court, in large majority of the cases, it is the same report which comes stating that CCTV footage is not available on account of one reason or other,” the bench said.
The judges also noted that the broader issue of CCTV system failures across Uttar Pradesh was already being examined separately in another case, in which the judgment had been reserved.
The bench further clarified that a claim of CCTV malfunction would be sufficient for it to accept the petitioner's contention that the man had been unlawfully detained and that the footage had been deliberately withheld to “obfuscate the truth maliciously”.
Expressing displeasure with the SHO, the court recorded that she had deliberately failed to make the CCTV recordings available. It directed that this finding be entered into her service records and asked the state government to consider whether she should continue in her present posting.
The ruling brings renewed attention to police accountability and the protection of fundamental rights, particularly the role of CCTV surveillance in establishing what happens inside and around police stations.
Taking serious note of the repeated failure of police stations to produce CCTV recordings, the court observed that “the civil liberties situation in the state is shameful, to say the least”.
The court also made it clear that the police cannot rely on claims of CCTV malfunction to evade scrutiny in cases involving allegations of illegal detention.
According to Live Law, a division bench comprising Justices Atul Sreedharan and Achal Sachdev said the police appeared to have “little regard” for the fundamental rights and civil liberties of citizens. The bench further observed that violations of these rights seemed to have become routine within the Uttar Pradesh Police.
The observations came while hearing a habeas corpus petition filed by Afzal Ahmad's daughter. She alleged that her father was taken into custody by the Bijnor Police on September 5, 2026, but his formal arrest was recorded only on September 7, two days later.
The court directed the authorities to release Ahmad forthwith and ordered the Adityanath government to pay Rs 20,000 in costs to him within seven days.
According to the petition, Ahmad and his daughter had gone to the police station after being summoned by the police. At around 2.30 pm on September 5, while they were sitting in their vehicle and had contacted the station house officer (SHO), another car entered the premises near the police station gate. Four persons, allegedly police personnel and Special Operations Group (SOG) officials in plain clothes, got out, surrounded their vehicle and forcibly took Ahmad away.
Seeking to establish the circumstances of his disappearance, the high court had earlier directed the state government to produce CCTV footage from the police station covering the period between 1 pm on September 5 and 10 am on September 7.
However, the state informed the court that the recordings were unavailable. It cited a general diary entry dated September 5, which claimed that a thunderstorm had caused water to seep through a LAN cable into the CCTV system, resulting in its malfunction, Live Law reported.
The explanation failed to convince the bench, which highlighted the recurring inability of police authorities to produce CCTV footage whenever sought by the court.
“In case after case whenever CCTV footages are called for by this court, in large majority of the cases, it is the same report which comes stating that CCTV footage is not available on account of one reason or other,” the bench said.
The judges also noted that the broader issue of CCTV system failures across Uttar Pradesh was already being examined separately in another case, in which the judgment had been reserved.
The bench further clarified that a claim of CCTV malfunction would be sufficient for it to accept the petitioner's contention that the man had been unlawfully detained and that the footage had been deliberately withheld to “obfuscate the truth maliciously”.
Expressing displeasure with the SHO, the court recorded that she had deliberately failed to make the CCTV recordings available. It directed that this finding be entered into her service records and asked the state government to consider whether she should continue in her present posting.
The ruling brings renewed attention to police accountability and the protection of fundamental rights, particularly the role of CCTV surveillance in establishing what happens inside and around police stations.
Comments (0)
Leave a Comment