‘Technical Glitch’ No Excuse: Allahabad HC Orders UP Home Secretary to Explain Missing Police Station CCTV Footage

The Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) has directed the Principal Secretary (Home), Uttar Pradesh, to personally inquire into the failure of the police to preserve CCTV footage at Police Station PGI, Lucknow, in a habeas corpus petition alleging illegal detention and suppression of arrest details.

Court was hearing a petition filed on behalf of Vivek Singh, who alleged that he was taken into custody on November 7, 2025, without being informed of the grounds of arrest and was kept incommunicado for several days.

Court noted that despite repeated directions, the police had failed to place clear and consistent material regarding the petitioner’s custody and movements.

In its order dated January 21, 2026, the bench of Justices Abdul Moin and Babita Rani recorded that the personal affidavit filed by the Commissioner of Police, Lucknow, stated that CCTV footage of Police Station PGI was not available due to a “technical glitch”. The affidavit further disclosed that a preliminary enquiry into the issue was ordered only on January 13, 2026.

Court expressed serious concern over this explanation, observing that the non-preservation of CCTV footage was in violation of binding directions issued by the Supreme Court in Paramvir Singh Saini v. Baljit Singh, which mandate preservation of CCTV footage for a minimum prescribed period.

The bench also referred to a circular issued by the Director General of Police, Uttar Pradesh, on June 20, 2025, directing preservation of CCTV footage for at least two to two-and-a-half months.

Rejecting the explanation of a “technical glitch”, court observed that authorities could not evade responsibility by shifting blame without explaining when the alleged glitch was detected and why corrective steps were delayed. The bench noted that the affidavit did not disclose from which date the CCTV system had stopped recording or whether any backup mechanism was in place.\

Court also flagged a significant factual inconsistency emerging from the mobile location data placed on record. It noted that the petitioner’s phone location on November 9, 2025, after being switched on, was found within 200 metres of the place from where he was later shown to have been arrested by the Cyber Crime Police Station, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, on November 10, 2025. Describing this as a “strange coincidence”, court directed that this aspect must also be specifically addressed by the Principal Secretary (Home).

Earlier, the State had taken the stand that the petitioner was not arrested in Lucknow but was taken into custody by the cyber crime police in Tamil Nadu. On the State’s submission, court allowed impleadment of the Cyber Crime Police Station, Coimbatore, as a respondent in the habeas corpus petition.

In view of the seriousness of the allegations and the apparent non-compliance with Supreme Court directions on CCTV preservation, the bench directed the Principal Secretary (Home), Uttar Pradesh, to personally inquire into the matter and file a detailed affidavit within three weeks explaining the failure to preserve CCTV footage and the delay in initiating a preliminary enquiry.

Court listed the matter for further hearing on February 18, 2026, and directed that in case the personal affidavit is not filed, the Principal Secretary (Home), Uttar Pradesh, shall appear in person along with the relevant records to assist the court. 

Case Title: Vivek Singh Thru. His Father Kamlesh Singh vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lucknow and Others

Order Date; January 21, 2026

Bench: Justices Abdul Moin and Babita Rani