Court stresses urgent compliance with CCTV installation in police stations, reprimands administrative delay in circulating judicial orders, and demands compensation release for illegal detention
In a significant judgment delivered on October 8, 2026, the Allahabad High Court, presided over by Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal, addressed multiple critical issues concerning police accountability, bail conditions, and judicial oversight in Uttar Pradesh. The case, titled Sandeep Singh Solanki v. State of U.P., originated from a bail cancellation application where the applicant sought cancellation of bail granted to the accused on the ground that the accused had failed to deposit Rs. 15 lakh as allegedly undertaken at the time of bail.
During proceedings, the Court was informed that the accused had not deposited the amount due to circumstances beyond his control and had subsequently been arrested in a separate case under the Gangster Act. The accused also alleged harassment by police officials for pursuing compensation awarded by the High Court for illegal detention. The Court noted these grievances seriously.
Rather than cancelling the bail outright, the Court called for instructions from the Director General of Police (DGP), Uttar Pradesh, regarding action taken against the erring police officials, referring to earlier Court directions dated February 19, 2026. This move highlights the Court's preference for accountability and administrative reform over punitive bail revocation.
Moreover, the Court condemned the District Magistrate's delay in releasing compensation for illegal detention, terming such inaction "contemptuous," and directed copies of the order to be sent to both the DGP and District Magistrate of Lalitpur to ensure compliance.
A major highlight of the judgment was the reiteration of earlier Supreme Court directives from Paramvir Singh Saini v. Baljit Singh (2021) 1 SCC 184, which mandated the installation and functioning of CCTV cameras in police stations to enhance transparency and accountability. The Court reiterated that Chief Judicial Magistrates (CJMs) or concerned Magistrates must randomly inspect police stations after court hours to verify CCTV operation, with prior intimation to District Judges. This inspection is to be treated as official duty, and any hindrance or disrespect to judicial officers during such inspections would attract strict action.
The Court also expressed concern over administrative lapses delaying the circulation of its February 19, 2026 order to all District Judges of Uttar Pradesh. It criticized the Committee responsible for approval, stressing that judicial orders cannot be withheld on administrative grounds. If the Committee finds the order legally questionable, it must refer the matter to the Litigation Committee to challenge the order appropriately. This marks a strong reaffirmation of the judiciary's supremacy and the need for prompt administrative compliance.
The Court adjourned the bail cancellation matter to October 27, 2026, allowing time for the DGP to report on disciplinary actions against police officials and for further developments regarding the compensation application.
This judgment underscores the Allahabad High Court's proactive stance on ensuring police accountability, protecting the rights of accused persons, and enforcing transparency measures in police stations. It also sends a clear message regarding the non-negotiable nature of judicial orders and the importance of timely administrative action in the criminal justice system.
Statutory provision(s):
- Criminal Procedure Code (relevant bail provisions)
- Gangster Act (relevant provisions related to arrest)
Sandeep Singh Solanki v. State of U.P., (Allahabad) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2999783
