Police modernisation scheme awaits Finance Ministry’s nod, Centre tells Supreme Court

The Supreme Court's suo motu intervention over non-functional CCTV cameras in police stations marks a critical juncture in India's ongoing struggle with custodial violence and police accountability. The case originated from alarming data showing a spike in custodial deaths — 175 reported in 2021-22 alone according to the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) — prompting the apex court to take cognizance under Article 32 of the Constitution, which empowers it to enforce fundamental rights. The Court's 2020 directive in Paramvir Singh Saini v. Baljit Singh mandated CCTV installation in all police stations with night vision and audio recording, covering entry-exit points, lock-ups, and interrogation rooms, to be monitored by an independent oversight mechanism. Yet, as the Centre admitted in its affidavit, the Police Modernisation Scheme — a Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) under the Ministry of Home Affairs — remains stalled awaiting Finance Ministry approval for fund allocation. This scheme, originally launched in 1969-70 and revamped multiple times (notably in 2000-01 and 2017-18), aims to modernise police forces through technology, mobility, forensic infrastructure, and training. The current impasse reflects deeper structural issues: the 7th Schedule places 'Police' under State List (Entry 2), making states primarily responsible, but the Centre supplements efforts via CSS. However, fund release delays, utilisation gaps (states often surrender unspent funds), and lack of outcome-based monitoring plague implementation. The constitutional stakes are profound — Article 21 (Right to Life) as interpreted in DK Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997) and Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa (1993) imposes a positive obligation on the state to protect detainees from torture and death. Custodial violence also violates India's commitments under the UN Convention Against Torture (UNCAT), signed in 1997 but not yet ratified due to absence of domestic anti-torture law. The Prevention of Torture Bill lapsed multiple times (2010, 2017). Politically, this exposes the gap between judicial activism and executive compliance. Socially, it erodes public trust — the 2022 India Justice Report ranks police lowest in public confidence. Economically, underinvestment in policing (India spends ~0.8% of GDP vs global avg 1.5%) compromises rule of law, deterring investment. The way forward requires: (1) immediate Finance Ministry clearance with time-bound fund release; (2) amending the Police Act, 1861 — a colonial relic — on lines of the Model Police Act, 2006 (Soli Sorabjee Committee); (3) establishing Police Complaints Authorities per Prakash Singh v. Union of India (2006) directives; (4) ratifying UNCAT with enabling legislation; and (5) leveraging technology like body-worn cameras and AI-based monitoring. For aspirants, this case encapsulates the interplay of constitutional law, federalism, public administration, and human rights — a microcosm of India's governance challenges.