SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 46090

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
L. Victoria Gowri, J
Mathiyavan Irumporai – Appellant
Versus
District Collector – Respondent
W.P Crl.(MD)No.2609 of 2026|W.M.P Crl.(MD)No.633 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Henri Patrick Tiphance
For the Respondents: C.Satheesh, S.S.Manoj

State authorities are legally obligated to preserve and provide copies of CCTV footage from police stations and relevant public areas upon request, pursuant to established Supreme Court guidelines on digital surveillance evidence.

Headnote:The case involves a petition seeking a Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, requesting the preservation and production of CCTV footage from a police station and a local auto stand, citing non-compliance with the Supreme Court's mandate on digital surveillance evidence. The petitioner alleged unlawful registration of criminal cases and arrests, asserting that the footage was crucial for defense. The Court, recognizing the limited scope of the relief, directed the authorities to preserve and provide the requested footage. The core issue was whether the authorities are obligated to provide requested CCTV footage under the framework established in Paramvir Singh Saini. The Court’s ratio decidendi emphasizes the necessity of preserving digital evidence in police custody to ensure transparency and uphold the rights of accused individuals, thereby aligning with the standing judicial mandate on police surveillance record-keeping. The Writ Petition is disposed of with directions to the police authorities to secure and disclose the identified CCTV footage.

Table of Content
1. petitioners' plea for mandatory production of official police cctv footage. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court's issuance of positive directions to authorities for evidence preservation. (Para 3 , 4)

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 30/04/2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE L. VICTORIA GOWRI W.P Crl.(MD)No.2609 of 2026 and W.M.P Crl.(MD)No.633 of 2026 Mathiyavan @ Mathiyavan Irumporai ... Petitioner Vs

1.The District Collector, Chairperson, District Level Over Sight Committee (DLOC), Office of the District Collector, Theni - 625 531.

2.The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Theni - 625 531.

3.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Office of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Periyakulam Police Sub Division, Periyakulam, Theni - 625 601.

4.The Inspector of Police, Theni Police Station, Theni - 625 601. ... Respondents PRAYER :-

Writ Petition Criminal filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the Respondents No. 1 to 4 herein to protect all the CCTV footage at Theni Police Station and the Pennycuick Auto Stand CCTV camera installed by the 4th respondent Police officials on 05.01.2026 – from 10.PM to 12.PM and on 09.01.2026 from 06.00 A.M to 09.00 P.M and direct the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 to provide a copy of the CCTV footage to the petitioner in compliance with the order of the Supreme Court in SLP(Crl.)No.3543 of 2020 (paramvir singh Saini vs. Baljit Singh, dated 02.12.2020) in light of the petitioner's representation dated 30.01.2026. For Petitioner : Mr.Henri Patrick Tiphance For Respondents : Mr.C.Satheesh Government Advocate (Crl Side)

for R.1 Mr.S.S.Manoj Government Advocate (Crl Side)

for R.2 to R.4

ORDER

This Writ Petition Criminal is filed seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the Respondents No. 1 to 4 herein to protect all the CCTV footage at Theni Police Station and the Pennycuick Auto Stand CCTV camera installed by the 4th respondent Police officials on 05.01.2026 – from 10.PM to 12.PM and on 09.01.2026 from 06.00 A.M to 09.00 P.M and direct the respondent Nos.1 to 4 to provide a copy of the CCTV footage to the petitioner in compliance with the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP(Crl.)No.3543 of 2020 (paramvir singh Saini vs. Baljit Singh, dated 02.12.2020) in light of the petitioner's representation dated 30.01.2026.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that on

05.01.2026, a false case was registered against the petitioner and others who are the auto drivers and on 09.01.2026, several auto drivers were unlawfully arrested, including the petitioner. Later, the police dismantled the Pennycuick Auto Stand to destroy the livelihood of Dalit workers and continue to prevent them from operating. Hence the petitioner had sent a representation on 30.01.2026, seeking to preserve the CCTV footage at Theni Police Station and the Pennycuick Auto Stand CCTV camera – on 05.01.2026 from 10.PM to 12.PM and on 09.01.2026 from 06.00 A.M to 09.00 P.M and direct the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 to provide a copy of the CCTV footage to the petitioner. The same is not considered, hence the petition is filed.

3. Considering the limited scope of the relief sought for, the second respondents is directed to make sure that the fourth respondent police preserves the CCTV footage at Theni Police Station and the Pennycuick Auto Stand CCTV camera – on 05.01.2026 from 10.PM to 12.PM and on 09.01.2026 from 06.00 A.M to 09.00 P.M and direct the respondent Nos.1 to 4 to provide a copy of the CCTV footage to the petitioner .

4. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top