A Single Bench consisting of Justice Amol Rattan Singh of Hon’ble HC was hearing a plea filed by alleged gangster Kaushal Chaudhary for violations of Human Rights where Kaushal prayed for various directions from the Court. Some of them were

  • videography of his leaving and entering the jail after interrogation.
  • Medical Examination though a board of doctors or though civil hospital so that if any torture is done that can be uncovered .
  •  His location of being taken should be communicated to his lawyer or family members.

Whereas the DGP Haryana stated that there is no such provision in CrPC for conducting an investigation under Camera, he also submitted that CCTV Cameras were already installed at the entry and exit points of the police station.

To this, the Court mentioned the directions of Supreme Court in case of Paramvir Singh Saini vs Baljit Singh and Ors in which Supreme Court clarify that –

“cameras be installed at not just entry and exit points and main gates of police stations, but also in all lock-ups, corridors, lobby and reception areas, verandas, outhouses, rooms of officials, outside the lock-up rooms, station hall and in front of the police station compound, as also outside washrooms and toilets, the obvious implication is that no part of the police stations would be left uncovered by CCTV surveillance. Naturally, therefore, any interrogation room would also be covered by such directions.” HC said.

 Further, the court directed that “not just in the case of the present petitioner, but in the case of every person who is in police custody or is being taken into police custody, all provisions of Cr.P.C.including Section 41-B, 41-C, 41-D and 54, 55 and 55-A would be meticulously followed, with compliance reports in that regard to be. made a part of the report under Section 173 of the Cr.P.C., as regards even medical examination necessarily be conducted in term of section 55A.”

The court directed the DGPs of Haryana, Punjab and Chandigarh to file detailed affidavits whether guidelines issued by Supreme Court, were compiled with or not.

The court said that they agree with the very fact that police and investigating agencies face many difficulties while dealing with hardened criminals but they can not deny them fair Procedure under the Constitutional scheme.

High Court stated that “in India, to take a plea that many other countries are far more advanced than us and therefore there can be no comparison with the methods adopted there, in interrogating accused persons here. We are the 5th or 6th largest economy in the world and therefore any such plea taken would only seem to be taken as an excuse to not actually adopt contemporary methods of investigation, including interrogation, rather than taking shortcuts by taking third-degree methods.”

Court has adjourned the matter till 9 February.

This news article has been written by Charu Sharma.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here