Andhra Pradesh High Court – Amravati
Pankaja Sree Vallabhaneni vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 10 March, 2025
APHC010098542025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3457]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF MARCH
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
WRIT PETITION NO: 5470 OF 2025
Between:
Pankaja Sree Vallabhaneni ...PETITIONER
AND
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri V.Devi Satya Sri
Counsel for the Respondents: Ld. Special Govt. Pleader
The Court made the following order:
1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
Special Government Pleader appearing for the State.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is
aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents in not considering the
representation of the petitioner dated 17.02.2025. The learned
counsel further submits that representation for securing the
C.C.T.V. footage of Patamata police station from 10.02.2025 to
15.02.2025 in connection with crime No.86 of 2025 of Patamata
-2-
W.P. No.5470 of 2025police station, Vijayawada. The learned counsel also submits that
C.C.T.V. footage which is recorded at the Patamata police station is
crucial for the case registered against the husband of the petitioner.
3. On 05.03.2025, the learned Assistant Government Pleader
submitted that C.C.T.V. footage would generally be stored for one
year.
4. Today, the learned Special Government Pleader representing the
State submits that the petitioner, who is the wife of the accused,
has submitted a representation and that she cannot maintain the
writ petition. It is also submitted by the learned Special
Government Pleader that the C.C.T.V. footage would in any way be
stored and that the representation of the petitioner, dated
17.02.2025, would be considered and appropriate orders would be
passed.
5. The learned Special Government Pleader further submits that the
petitioner has submitted an application dated 22.02.2025 under the
Right to Information Act, 2005 seeking a copy of the C.C.T.V.
footage for the period 10.02.2025 to 15.02.2025 that may have to
be dealt with by the concerned police in accordance with the
provisions of the Right to Information Act.
6. Considering the prayer of the petitioner that the petitioner is only
seeking a direction to the 3rd respondent to secure the C.C.T.V.
-3-
W.P. No.5470 of 2025
footage of all premises of Patamata police station including inside
and outside area of Patamata police station from 10.02.2025 to
15.02.2025 in connection with crime No.86 of 2025 is only in the
interest of petitioner and also in the interest of the State.
7. C.C.T.V. footage has to be essentially stored for a period of one
year in accordance with the guidelines of the Hon’ble Supreme
Court rendered in the matter of Paramvir Singh Saini v. Baljit
Singh and others1 while dealing with the issue of installation of
C.C.T.V. cameras in police stations. The Hon’ble Supreme Court
further held that the installation of C.C.T.V. cameras is in
pursuance of the directions in the matter of D.K. Basu v. State of
West Bengal2 wherein it was held that there was a need for further
directions that in every State an oversight mechanism be created
whereby an independent committee can study the CCTV camera
footages and periodically publish a report of its observations
thereon.
8. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the matter of Paramvir Singh Saini
(supra1), directed all the States and Union Territories to file
compliance affidavits insofar as the position of C.C.T.V. cameras in
each police station detailing the total number of cameras installed
1
(2021) 1 SCC 184
2
(2015) 8 SCC 744
-4-
W.P. No.5470 of 2025
in each police station, the positioning of the C.C.T.V. cameras
which are already installed; working condition of the C.C.T.V.
cameras; whether the C.C.T.V. cameras have a recording facility
and the details of the capacity of recording available. The relevant
portion of the said judgment reads as under:
“10. So far as constitution of Oversight Committees in accordance with
our Order dated 03.04.2018 is concerned, this should be done at
the State and District levels. The State Level Oversight Committee
(hereinafter referred to as the “SLOC”) must consist of:
(i) The Secretary/ Additional Secretary, Home
Department;
(ii) Secretary/Additional Secretary, Finance
Department;
(iii) The Director General/Inspector General of Police;
and
(iv) The Chairperson/ member of the State Women’s
Commission.
11. So far as the District Level Oversight Committee (hereinafter
referred to as “DLOC”) is concerned, this should comprise of:
(i) The Divisional Commissioner/ Commissioner of Divisions/
Regional Commissioner/ Revenue Commissioner Division of the
District (by whatever name called);
(ii) The District Magistrate of the District;
(iii) A Superintendent of Police of that District; and
(iv) A mayor of a municipality within the District/ a Head of the Zilla
Panchayat in rural areas.
12. It shall be the duty of the SLOC to see that the directions passed
by this Court are carried out. Amongst others, the duties shall
consist of:
a) Purchase, distribution and installation of CCTVs
and its equipment;
b) Obtaining the budgetary allocation for the same;
c) Continuous monitoring of maintenance and
-5-
W.P. No.5470 of 2025upkeep of CCTVs and its equipment;
d) Carrying out inspections and addressing the
grievances received from the DLOC; and
e) To call for monthly reports from the DLOC and
immediately address any concerns like faulty
equipment.
Likewise, the DLOC shall have the following obligations:
a) Supervision, maintenance and upkeep of CCTVs
and its equipment;
b) Continuous monitoring of maintenance and
upkeep of CCTVs and its equipment;
c) To interact with the Station House Officer
(hereinafter referred to as the “SHO”) as to the
functioning and maintenance of CCTVs and its
equipment; and
d) To send monthly reports to the SLOC about the
functioning of CCTVs and allied equipment.
To review footage stored from CCTVs in the
various Police Stations to check for any human
rights violation that may have occurred but are
not reported.
13…..
14. The duty and responsibility for the working, maintenance and
recording of CCTVs shall be that of the SHO of the police station
concerned. It shall be the duty and obligation of the SHO to
immediately report to the DLOC any fault with the equipment or
malfunctioning of CCTVs. If the CCTVs are not functioning in a
particular police station, the concerned SHO shall inform the
DLOC of the arrest / interrogations carried out in that police station
during the said period and forward the said record to the DLOC. If
the concerned SHO has reported malfunctioning or non-
functioning of CCTVs of a particular Police Station, the DLOC shall
immediately request the SLOC for repair and purchase of the
equipment, which shall be done immediately.
15. The Director General/Inspector General of Police of each State and
Union Territory should issue directions to the person in charge of a
Police Station to entrust the SHO of the concerned Police Station
with the responsibility of assessing the working condition of the
-6-
W.P. No.5470 of 2025
CCTV cameras installed in the police station and also to take
corrective action to restore the functioning of all non-functional
CCTV cameras. The SHO should also be made responsible for
CCTV data maintenance, backup of data, fault rectification etc.
16. The State and Union Territory Governments should ensure that
CCTV cameras are installed in each and every Police Station
functioning in the respective State and/or Union Territory. Further,
in order to ensure that no part of a Police Station is left uncovered,
it is imperative to ensure that CCTV cameras are installed at all
entry and exit points; main gate of the police station; all lock-ups;
all corridors; lobby/the reception area; all verandas/outhouses,
Inspector’s room; Sub- Inspector’s room; areas outside the lock-up
room; station hall; in front of the police station compound; outside
(not inside) washrooms/toilets; Duty Officer’s room; back part of
the police station etc.
17. CCTV systems that have to be installed must be equipped with
night vision and must necessarily consist of audio as well as video
footage. In areas in which there is either no electricity and/or
internet, it shall be the duty of the States/Union Territories to
provide the same as expeditiously as possible using any mode of
providing electricity, including solar/wind power. The internet
systems that are provided must also be systems which provide
clear image resolutions and audio. Most important of all is the
storage of CCTV camera footage which can be done in digital
video recorders and/or network video recorders. CCTV cameras
must then be installed with such recording systems so that the
data that is stored thereon shall be preserved for a period of 18
months. If the recording equipment, available in the market today,
does not have the capacity to keep the recording for 18 months but
for a lesser period of time, it shall be mandatory for all States,
Union Territories and the Central Government to purchase one
which allows storage for the maximum period possible, and, in any
case, not below 1 year. It is also made clear that this will be
reviewed by all the States so as to purchase equipment which is
able to store the data for 18 months as soon as it is commercially
available in the market. The affidavit of compliance to be filed by
all States and Union Territories and Central Government shall
clearly indicate that the best equipment available as of date has
been purchased.”
-7-
W.P. No.5470 of 2025
9. These directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court are issued in
furtherance of protecting the fundamental rights of the citizens
guaranteed under the constitution. In the present case, the
petitioner is only seeking a direction to preserve the C.C.T.V.
recordings for the period from 10.02.2025 to 15.02.2025, which the
station house officer is any way bound to.
10. Following the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court
and considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the
petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader, this Court
deems it appropriate to allow the writ petition, directing the 3rd
respondent to secure C.C.T.V. footage of all premises, including
inside and outside area, of Patamata police station from 10.02.2025
to 15.02.2025 and store it safely for the purposes and in connection
with Crime No.86 of 2025 of Patamata police station, Vijayawada.
11. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed without costs.
12. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall
stand closed.
____________________
JUSTICE HARINATH. N
BV