Meghalaya HC orders CCTV details from state for all police stations
Synopsis
The Meghalaya High Court has put the state government on notice over CCTV surveillance in its police stations, ordering a detailed affidavit within four weeks. With the PIL zeroing in on Laban Police Station and all other stations statewide, the case could set a precedent for how Meghalaya enforces judicial guidelines on custodial transparency.
Key Takeaways
The Meghalaya High Court directed the state to submit an affidavit on CCTV camera status across all police stations within four weeks .
The bench is led by Chief Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice W.
The PIL was filed by Kishan K.
Nongkynrih and concerns police accountability and surveillance compliance.
The affidavit must cover camera locations, coverage extent, and footage retention duration, including at Laban Police Station , Shillong .
The matter is next listed for hearing on 24 July .
The Meghalaya High Court has directed the state government to submit a comprehensive affidavit detailing the installation and operational status of CCTV cameras across all police stations in the state, including the Laban Police Station in Shillong. The order was passed on 19 June during the hearing of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) focused on police accountability and transparency.
The Court's Directions
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice W. Diengdoh directed the state to file its affidavit-in-reply within four weeks. The bench specified that the affidavit must detail the number and location of cameras installed, the extent of coverage within police premises, and the duration for which recorded footage is retained.
'The affidavit shall set out the data with respect to CCTV cameras installed in the Laban Police Station as well as other police stations in the State of Meghalaya, their locations and the memory of the footage, among other details,' the bench stated in its order.
State Seeks Time, Court Grants Extension
Additional Advocate General K. Khan, appearing for the state government, sought additional time to compile and place the required information before the court. The bench granted the request while directing the state to comply within the stipulated period. The court also instructed that an advance copy of the affidavit be served on the petitioner's counsel ahead of the next hearing, to ensure effective consideration of the matter.
Background and PIL Details
The PIL was filed by petitioner Kishan K. Nongkynrih and pertains to police accountability and compliance with judicial guidelines on surveillance and monitoring mechanisms in police stations. This comes amid a broader national conversation on custodial safety and the role of CCTV footage in ensuring transparency within law-enforcement facilities — a concern that courts across India have periodically flagged. The Supreme Court has in past rulings underscored the importance of functional CCTV systems in police stations as a safeguard against custodial abuse.
What Happens Next
The bench further directed the petitioner's counsel to serve a copy of the PIL and the latest court order on the concerned respondents to facilitate their appearance through legal counsel at the next date of hearing. The matter has been listed for further hearing on 24 July.
Point of View
Including footage retention duration, the bench is probing not just installation but operational integrity. The real question the affidavit must answer is whether cameras are recording continuously and whether footage is being preserved long enough to be of evidentiary value — two areas where states have historically underperformed.
NationPress
5 Aug 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
Why has the Meghalaya High Court sought CCTV details from police stations?
The court is hearing a PIL filed by Kishan K. Nongkynrih focused on police accountability and compliance with judicial guidelines on surveillance in police stations. The bench directed the state to submit an affidavit detailing CCTV camera installations, coverage, and footage retention across all police stations in Meghalaya.
Which police station is specifically mentioned in the court order?
The Laban Police Station in Shillong is specifically named in the bench's order, alongside a broader direction covering all police stations across the state of Meghalaya.
What must the state government include in its affidavit?
The affidavit must detail the number and location of CCTV cameras installed, the extent of coverage within police premises, and the duration for which recorded footage is stored, according to the court's directions.
When is the next hearing in this case?
The Meghalaya High Court has listed the matter for further hearing on 24 July. The state has been given four weeks to file its affidavit-in-reply, with an advance copy to be served on the petitioner's counsel.
Who is appearing for the state government in this case?
Additional Advocate General K. Khan is appearing on behalf of the Meghalaya state government. He sought additional time to compile the required information, which the bench granted within the four-week deadline.
