The Delhi High Court has directed the Ministry of Home Affairs to conduct an inquiry into a violent incident that allegedly occurred at a detention centre in Lampur, after multiple government agencies failed to take responsibility for producing CCTV footage related to the event. The case came before the Court in the context of bail applications filed by two foreign nationals who were accused of assaulting a guard during an altercation at the Seva Sadan detention facility. The bench, led by Justice Girish Kathpalia, expressed serious concern over the absence of CCTV footage and the lack of clarity regarding which agency was in charge of maintaining it.
The Court observed that several authorities, including the Delhi Police, Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO), Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), and the Department of Social Welfare, had been involved with the facility in various capacities. However, each agency passed the responsibility for CCTV oversight onto the others. The Department of Social Welfare claimed that the CRPF managed the CCTV systems, the CRPF pointed to the FRRO, and the FRRO redirected the responsibility back to the Social Welfare Department. This cycle of blame-shifting prompted the Court to conclude that either the footage was unavailable due to a lack of proper custodianship, or it was being deliberately withheld.
The Court highlighted that despite repeated opportunities and adjournments, the prosecution had failed to submit the CCTV footage that could have provided crucial visual evidence of the alleged incident. The bench stated that the prosecution must demonstrate the legality of the incident and rule out the possibility that it had been fabricated by inmates as a strategy to avoid deportation. The failure to produce such evidence undermined the ability to ascertain the truth and raised concerns about institutional accountability.
In light of these developments, the High Court granted bail to the two accused foreign nationals on the condition that they return to the detention centre after release. Since the individuals lacked valid passports and visas, the Court considered it unfeasible to release them into the general population. However, the judge noted that the grant of bail would not impede the deportation process once the legal and documentation issues were resolved. The bail was granted primarily to safeguard the rights of the accused while ensuring continued oversight.
In its order, the Court emphasized that a copy of the judgment be forwarded to the Secretary of the Ministry of Home Affairs for further investigation into the matter. The aim of this direction was to determine which authority was ultimately responsible for the maintenance and availability of CCTV footage at detention centres and to address the systemic failures exposed by the case.
The Delhi High Court underlined that in any secure facility, such as a detention centre, the preservation and accessibility of CCTV footage is essential for transparency and justice. It stressed that agencies operating within such premises must maintain proper coordination and take clear responsibility for managing surveillance infrastructure. The Court concluded that the lack of clarity surrounding the custodianship of vital evidence posed a serious threat to procedural fairness and accountability, necessitating central oversight and corrective measures by the Ministry of Home Affairs.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.