AGNES MICHALE v. CHERANELLOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH

Shaji Thomas MOHAN PULIKKAL(K/64A/1985) JEN JAISON(K/000208/2017) SRI.P.S.APPU, GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 1485 OF 2023 -3- JUDGMENT The petitioner alleges that the 4th respondent is intruding into her privacy, by installing CCTV Camera facing her house and property; and that, therefore, she has approached respondents 1 to 3, to take necessary action to remove the same, which has not yet been heeded. She says that she has, therefore, been constrained to approach this Court; and prays that the official respondents be directed to take immediate steps to dismantle the CCTV Camera installed by the 4th respondent, as evident from Ext.P1 photograph.

In response to the afore submissions of Sri.K.R.Vinod – learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader – Sri.P.S.Appu, submitted that the 3rd respondent – Station House Officer, had made a visit to the WP(C) NO. 1485 OF 2023 -4- area in question, to find that the CCTC Camera installed by the 4th respondent is pointing to a public road and not into the property of the petitioner. He submitted that, therefore, the petitioner cannot have a case of intrusion of privacy; but that, if this Court is so inclined, the said Authority is willing to hear both sides and take a final decision.

Sri. Shaji Thomas – learned counsel for the 4th respondent, submitted that the allegations of the petitioner are wholly untrue and that his client has not placed any CCTV Camera in any manner so as to intrude into the privacy of the petitioner. He submitted that the said Camera has been installed only for the sake of his client’s security and no other; and therefore, prayed that this writ petition be dismissed.

Sri.P.K.Ajith Kumar – learned Standing WP(C) NO. 1485 OF 2023 -5- Counsel for respondents 1 and 2, submitted that his clients have no role to play in the controversy in question because, what is projected by the petitioner is an inappropriate action by the 4th respondent – if her allegations are true.

In reply, however, Sri.K.R.Vinod submitted that, as evident from Ext.P1 photograph itself, the CCTV Camera in question has been installed by the 4th respondent in a public space, which itself is illegal and unlawful; for which, both respondents 1 and 2, as also respondent No.3, must take necessary action. He submitted that, therefore, his client is entitled to press for the reliefs sought for in this writ petition and pleaded that it be granted.

When I evaluate and consider the afore rival submissions, it is clear that there is a WP(C) NO. 1485 OF 2023 -6- disputation as to whether the CCTV Camera installed by the 4th respondent is in a public space and whether it is directed towards the petitioner’s property or her house, thus violating her privacy. These issues certainly will have to be first looked into by the 3rd respondent; and, if he is to find that the first of the afore limbs are attracted, then he must report it to the 2nd respondent – secretary, for necessary and appropriate actions.

As far as the jurisdictional Police Officer is concerned, if any of the afore allegations are found true, he must issue necessary orders to the 4th respondent, as also take necessary action against him, in terms of the Indian Penal Code and such other applicable provisions. In the afore circumstances, I order this writ petition and direct the 3rd respondent to WP(C) NO. 1485 OF 2023 -7- immediately hear the petitioner, as also the 4th respondent, and make a site visit in their presence; thus culminating in an appropriate order and necessary action thereon, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to say, if, through the afore exercise, the 3rd respondent is to find that the CCTV Camera has been installed by the 4th respondent in a public space, he will report the same to the 2nd respondent – Secretary, who will thereupon take necessary action in terms of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act or such other applicable provisions, without any avoidable delay thereafter. After I dictated this part of the judgment, Sri.P.S.Appu – learned Government Pleader, pointed out that, in obedience to the interim WP(C) NO. 1485 OF 2023 -8- order of this Court dated 17.01.2023, the State Police Chief has recommended certain Guidelines for the installation of CCTV Cameras in public spaces or involving public spaces; and that the matter is now pending before the Government for appropriate orders. This is recorded. Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE WP(C) NO. 1485 OF 2023 -9- APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1485/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 EXHIBIT P2 EXHIBIT P3 THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE INSTALLATION OF CCTV CAMERA POINTING AT THE HOUSE OF THE PETITIONER THE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2 ND RESPONDENT DATED 29.12.2022 THE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE RECEIPT OF COMPLAINT BY THE 3 RD RESPONDENT RESPONDENT EXHIBITS EXHIBIT R4( A) TTRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 23.06.2022 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT R4( B) TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SCREENSHOT OF THE DVR MONITIOR WHICH SHOWS THE VIDEO CAPTURED BY THE CCTV CAMERA ALLEGED TO BE KEPT FACING THE HOME OF THE PETITIONER