Supreme Court Monitors CCTV Surveillance and Prison Conditions in Uttar Pradesh
- ByAdmin --
- 27 Jun 2025 --
- 0 Comments
In a significant push toward prison reform, the Supreme Court of India has intensified its oversight of jail administration in Uttar Pradesh, directing the state to fully implement CCTV surveillance measures and eliminate discriminatory practices within prisons. The directive comes amid mounting concerns about custodial deaths, caste-based segregation, and substandard detention conditions—all of which raise serious questions under constitutional and statutory law.
Background of the Case
The Supreme Court’s active involvement stems from the foundational judgment in D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997), which laid down mandatory safeguards against custodial torture and arbitrary detention. Building on this precedent, the Court issued successive directives in 2020 and 2023, requiring installation of CCTV cameras in all police stations and prisons—especially in lock-ups, interrogation rooms, and vulnerable zones.
Despite partial compliance by Uttar Pradesh, the Court noted ongoing failures: non-functional cameras, poor maintenance, and no real-time monitoring. These issues were compounded by reports of discrimination based on caste and socio-economic status, prompting the Court to expand its scrutiny of the state’s prison system.
Key Legal Framework
1. Article 21 – Right to Life and Personal Liberty
The Court reaffirmed that prisoners do not lose their constitutional rights upon incarceration. Acts of violence, neglect, or discrimination violate Article 21, which protects dignity and humane treatment.
2. Article 14 – Right to Equality
Any discriminatory treatment of inmates based on caste, religion, gender, or class violates the equality guarantee under Article 14, making uniform treatment a constitutional mandate.
3. Article 17 – Abolition of Untouchability
The Court addressed reports of caste-based segregation, labelling it a direct breach of Article 17, which prohibits untouchability and demands equal dignity for all.
4. Section 3, Prisons Act, 1894 and Model Prison Manual, 2016
These provide the legal foundation for prison governance, covering issues such as treatment of inmates, medical care, segregation protocols, and documentation standards.
Supreme Court’s Directives to Uttar Pradesh
1. Operational CCTV Surveillance
- Cameras must be installed, functional, and regularly maintained across all key areas.
- Data must be stored securely and made available to authorized oversight bodies.
2. Third-Party Monitoring
- The Court mandated periodic inspections by NALSA and the State Legal Services Authority.
- Reports on surveillance efficacy, living conditions, and rights violations must be submitted to the Court.
3. Abolition of Discriminatory Practices
- The state must revise its jail manuals to remove provisions enabling segregation based on caste or disability.
- A three-month deadline was imposed for these revisions.
4. Transparent Record-Keeping
- Detailed registers on medical care, custodial deaths, complaints, and surveillance logs must be maintained.
- A monitoring committee headed by the IG (Prisons) will review compliance.
5. Staff Training and Accountability
- Jail staff must undergo training on constitutional protections, anti-discrimination norms, and humane treatment protocols.
- Disciplinary or legal action will be taken against any official found guilty of misconduct.
Implementation Status
Though the Uttar Pradesh Prison Department claims to have installed over 900 CCTV units across 30 prisons, independent audits reveal that many cameras are either non-functional or not monitored effectively. Alarmingly, the state still reports one of the highest numbers of custodial deaths, highlighting a gap between infrastructure and accountability.
Implications of the Ruling
1. Strengthening Rule of Law
The decision reaffirms that legal protections do not end at the prison gate. The state is constitutionally bound to ensure humane, lawful custody.
2. Surveillance with Accountability
Surveillance systems must protect, not violate, individual rights. The Court clarified that CCTV footage must be stored and reviewed under strict legal protocols.
3. Modernization and Compliance
By demanding conformity with the Model Prison Manual, 2016, the ruling forces institutional modernization and compliance with national standards.
4. Continued Judicial Oversight
The Court’s insistence on regular reports and independent monitoring ensures that prison reform is an ongoing obligation, not a one-time exercise in box-ticking.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s intervention reflects a serious commitment to upholding the dignity, rights, and safety of prisoners—many of whom are undertrials or convicts eligible for remission. The ruling strengthens the constitutional message that custodial institutions must not become blind spots for human rights.
Through sustained judicial monitoring and binding directions, the judgment pushes Uttar Pradesh—and other states by implication—towards a prison system that is transparent, accountable, and constitutionally compliant.
0 comments