New Delhi: The Allahabad High Court has suggested that the DGP of Uttar Pradesh should make audio-video recording of witness statements mandatory for all criminal cases and how the recorded statements can help in transparency and accountability in police investigations. The direction was given by Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal on a bail application in a dowry death case.
The court’s observations center on statements made during criminal investigations under Section 180 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). It allows investigating officers to record witness statements through audio-video electronic means. The matter was before the court after an investigating officer told it that the statement of the first informant had been recorded under Section 180 BNSS but had not been audio-video recorded.
The investigating officer apologized unconditionally after the court asked about the failure of recording. The High Court also referred to directions and circulars issued by the Uttar Pradesh DGP regarding audio-video recording during investigations.
The High Court noted that it had come across multiple cases where investigating officers had not used audio-video recording while taking witness statements. According to the court’s observations, recording statements can provide an additional record of the investigation and may assist courts in judging the material in motion in bail proceedings and other stages of criminal cases.
The court also considered the situation in Uttar Pradesh, where audio-video recording had been made compulsory in some categories of cases, while remaining optional for other statements recorded under Section 180 of the BNSS.
The court noted that leaving the facility optional could potentially lead investigators to avoid recording. A recorded statement can help address allegations that an investigating officer independently prepared the statement of a witness by reproducing the contents of the FIR.
The High Court asked the DGP to consider extending the mandatory audio-video recording requirement to statements made under Section 180 BNSS in all criminal cases.
Directions For Investigating Officers
Apart from the wider use of audio-video recordings, the court gave a number of directions about the conduct of criminal investigations. Police officers investigating a cognisable offence were asked to arrive at the scene without delay and record the statements of the first informant and other witnesses promptly.
The court said such recordings should ideally be made using the E-Sakshya App and should be provided to the concerned court whenever required. Electronic records will be used to give courts more material on how statements were made during the investigation.
Investigating officers were also required to record statements of independent witnesses whenever such witnesses were available. Their accounts, the court said, can be relevant to establishing the circumstances surrounding an alleged offence.
The directions form part of the High Court’s overall emphasis on following prescribed investigative procedures. The Allahabad High Court has an official online system through which its judgments and orders can be accessed.
Specific Guidelines For Sexual Offence Cases
The court also made specific directions for investigations of rape and sexual assault. A victim’s statement should be recorded by a woman police officer at the victim’s residence or another place of her choice.
The court also directed that, upon the victim’s consent, she should be taken for a medical examination within 24 hours of the police receiving information about the alleged offence. For offences punishable with imprisonment of 10 years or more and rape and sexual assault cases, the victim should be brought before a magistrate for recording her statement as soon as the police become aware of the alleged offence.
These directions highlight procedural safeguards when recording statements and collecting evidence in sensitive criminal cases.
Instructions On Digital Evidence
The High Court also dealt with cases concerning the circulation of obscene videos. It ordered that police should take possession of the accused’s mobile phone in appropriate cases and, where necessary, send the device to a forensic science laboratory to retrieve relevant data.
The court said Cyber Cell officials and forensic experts should be involved wherever required. Investigators were also asked to get call detail records when information about a person's location or communications could help establish relevant facts in a case.
The court also referred to identification procedures. Where a victim does not know the accused but is able to identify the person, investigators were directed to conduct a test identification parade in accordance with the Uttar Pradesh Police Regulations.
Recovered articles should also be identified and then placed among similar articles where such identification is necessary.
Focus On Proper Investigation
The High Court directed that its guidelines be communicated to investigating officers. The court emphasized that proper investigation and presentation of evidence to the court must be done in accordance with law.
The proposed expansion of audio-video recording under Section 180 BNSS could therefore have implications for police investigations across Uttar Pradesh if the DGP agrees with the recommendation. For now, the direction asks the police leadership to consider making the practice mandatory across criminal cases, and the court’s other instructions set out specific expectations for investigating officers dealing with witnesses, victims, digital evidence, and identification procedures.
