Helina v. The Superintendent Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 25.02.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN Helina ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Superintendent of Police, O/o. Superintendent of Police, Thiruvallur District.

2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, O/o. Deputy Superintendent of Police, Oothukottai Range, Thiruvallur District.

3. The Inspector of Police, C-5, Vengal Police Station, Thiruvallur District.

... Respondents Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to preserve the CCTV footage dated 26.04.2023 to 27.04.2023 up to 11.59 p.m., at third respondent station in pursuant to the petitioner's representation dated 02.05.2023.

For Petitioner : Mr.Muthamizh Selvakumar For Respondents : Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed for direction directing the respondents to preserve the CCTV footage dated 26.04.2023 to 27.04.2023 up to 11.59 p.m., at third respondent station in pursuant to the petitioner's representation dated 02.05.2023. 2.

According to the petitioner, her husband was illegally taken from the petitioner's house and he was illegally detained in the police Station. After detaining the petitioner's husband, false case has been foisted as against him and remanded to judicial custody. Therefore, the petitioner's husband's arrest itself is illegal and therefore, she sought for CCTV footage to prove the illegal detention of the petitioner's husband. 3.

On perusal of the status report filed by the third respondent and on the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), it is revealed that the CCTV footage in the C-5 Vengal Police Station, Thiruvallur district, was corrupted even 15 days prior to the arrest of the petitioner's husband due to heavy rain and thunder and lightning. Further, the footage got corrupted and it cannot be retrieved from the hard disk. Therefore, no CCTV footage is available to preserve

the same.

4.

In view of the above facts and circumstances, the direction sought for in this writ petition cannot be granted and the writ petition stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. 25.02.2025 Index : Yes/No : Yes/No Speaking/non-speaking order rts To

1. The Superintendent of Police, O/o. Superintendent of Police, Thiruvallur District.

2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, O/o. Deputy Superintendent of Police, Oothukottai Range, Thiruvallur District.

3. The Inspector of Police, C-5, Vengal Police Station, Thiruvallur District.

4. The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai.

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN. J, rts 25.02.2025