Jharkhand HC pulls up DGP, issues contempt notice over CCTV delay in police stations
THE JHARKHAND STORY NETWORK RANCHI, September 1: The Jharkhand High Court has issued a notice to Director General of Police Tadasha Mishra,…
THE JHARKHAND STORY NETWORK
RANCHI, September 1: The Jharkhand High Court has issued a notice to Director General of Police Tadasha Mishra, seeking to know why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against her for failing to comply with repeated court directions to install CCTV cameras in all police stations across the state.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice M.S. Sonak and Justice Rajesh Shankar passed the order while hearing the suo motu PIL concerning custodial violence and CCTV installation in police stations. The order was issued on August 27.
Court says repeated tender excuses unacceptable
The court noted that despite its detailed order of June 18 and directions issued by various coordinate benches, no CCTV cameras have been installed in police stations in Jharkhand.
The bench observed that the State had repeatedly cited the process of inviting and cancelling tenders as a reason for the delay. It said the explanations placed before it were, prima facie, not satisfactory.
The court had earlier refrained from issuing a contempt notice to the DGP after giving the authorities another opportunity to comply. It had also directed that its order be placed before the Chief Secretary and Home Secretary so they could impress upon the police leadership the seriousness of the matter.
Despite this, the court observed that the directions remained unimplemented.
‘Police authorities seem interested in no CCTV cameras’
Expressing strong displeasure, the bench observed that the police authorities appeared to have an interest in ensuring that CCTV cameras were not installed in police stations.
The court recalled that the suo motu proceedings were initiated after a complaint that a person had allegedly been mercilessly beaten while in police custody.
The bench also referred to photographs of the complainant showing serious injuries, including to the left leg. It expressed concern over the medical report that had earlier found the person fit for custody.
Doctor asked to explain exoneration
The court also questioned the exoneration of Dr Jaya Agrawal, who had examined the complainant.
An inquiry had been conducted against the doctor and a report dated July 8, 2026, exonerated her on the ground that the fracture in the complainant’s left leg could not have been detected during clinical examination.
The bench said it was surprised and pained by the finding, particularly in view of the photographs showing serious injuries.
The court said it was not prepared to accept, at the prima facie stage, that a professionally trained doctor could not have noticed the injuries and correctly reported them.
Dr Agrawal has now been impleaded as a respondent in her personal capacity and directed to show cause why the July 8 report exonerating her should not be accepted. She may file her affidavit within two weeks of receiving the notice.
Eight weeks for CCTV installation
The High Court directed the Chief Secretary and Home Secretary to jointly and severally ensure installation of CCTV cameras in all police stations in Jharkhand within eight weeks.
The court made it clear that the senior officers would have to personally ensure compliance and could not delegate the responsibility to another officer.
The Chief Secretary or Home Secretary has also been directed to submit a compliance report by September 30, 2026, detailing the steps taken to implement the court’s directions.
DGP gets time till September 11
The court has allowed DGP Tadasha Mishra to file her affidavit by September 11 explaining the alleged non-compliance.
The contempt notice has been made returnable on September 24, when the matter will be taken up high on the board.
The court also directed the Registry to immediately serve the contempt notice on the DGP in the prescribed Form-1 under Rule 393 of the Jharkhand High Court Rules, 2001.
The order underscores the court’s growing concern over the prolonged failure to install surveillance systems in police stations, particularly in the backdrop of allegations of custodial violence.
