Court on Its Own Motion v. Sanjeev Kumar and Ors.

Calcutta HC18 Jan 2024CRLCP/23/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

NDPS videography compliance; CRM(NDPS) 1444/2023; CRLCP 23/2023; Court on its own Motion vs. Sanjeev Kumar & Ors.; SOP for video recording of search and seizure; training programmes; body worn cameras; video cameras; BSF; para military forces; Central Government fund release; further compliance report; proceeding closed; rule discharged; Gaurang Kanth J.; Joymalya Bagchi J.; 18.01.2024.

What did the court decide?

Noting the compliance steps reported (SOP issued, training conducted, 189 body worn and 123 video cameras purchased, demand for further funds for 443 and 130 cameras respectively), the court appreciated the steps taken. ¶¶14

Court on Its Own Motion Vs Sanjeev Kumar and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Disposed

¶¶17

Issue for consideration

Whether adequate compliance has been achieved on video recording of search and seizure in narcotics cases (issuance of SOP, training, procurement of body worn and video cameras, and funding thereof).

¶¶13

Court's answer

¶¶14

Ratio / Principle

With these observations the proceeding was closed and the rule discharged.

¶¶16

Key takeaways

The court expressed hope and trust that the Central Government shall release funds so that members of the BSF and other para military forces are provided adequate facilities in the form of body worn and video cameras to discharge their duties efficiently and videograph search and seizure proceedings.obiter¶¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Order dated 18.01.2024 in C. R. L. C. P. 23 of 2023 in C. R. M. (NDPS) 1444 of 2023, In Re: Court on its own Motion vs. Sanjeev Kumar & Ors. A further compliance report on video recording of search and seizure in narcotics cases was placed on record. The court noted that the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for video recording of search and seizure in narcotics and other cases has been issued, training programmes undertaken to apprise officers of the necessity to videograph the entire procedure, 189 body worn cameras and 123 video cameras purchased, and demand made for release of further funds to purchase 443 and 130 body worn and video cameras respectively. The court appreciated the steps taken and expressed hope and trust that the Central Government shall release funds so that members of the BSF and other para military forces are provided with adequate body worn and video cameras to videograph search and seizure proceedings. With these observations the proceeding was closed and the rule discharged. Coram: Gaurang Kanth, J. and Joymalya Bagchi, J.

Court on Its Own Motion v. Sanjeev Kumar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Court on Its Own Motion v. Sanjeev Kumar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pranjal Kaushik Vs State of West Bengal

Parvati Devi @ Pabitri Devi Jaiswal Vs State of West Bengal

Mukti Tirtha Andaman Co-Op Housing Society Ltd. & Anr. Vs W.B. Housing Infra. Dev. Corp. Ltd. & Ors.

Tahajul Mondal @ Kota and Anr. Vs the State of West Bengal

Balaram Halder Vs State of West Bengal

Surya Mal Vs State of West Bengal and Anr.