Archive · 4 Sep 2026
Tamil Nadu Police Asked to Explain CCTV Retention Shortfall
A court wants police stations in Tamil Nadu to keep security-camera recordings for a long time.
The Supreme Court’s rule says the recordings should be saved for 18 months.
But one police investigation office reportedly kept them for only 15 days.
This could mean important evidence was lost before it could be requested.
The issue came up in a case involving Sub-Inspector A Saravanakumar.
He asked the court to preserve camera footage and phone-related records.
The Madras High Court has asked the state’s top police officer to explain what happened.
The court said even being one minute short of the required period would break the Supreme Court’s order.
The matter will be heard again on September 10, 2026.
The Madras High Court ordered Tamil Nadu’s DGP to explain CCTV retention practices across the state.
The Supreme Court requires police CCTV footage to be preserved for 18 months, according to the court.
The Salem DVAC office reportedly retained footage for only 15 days.
The issue arose in Sub-Inspector A Saravanakumar’s petition seeking records linked to a corruption investigation.
The DGP’s report is due before the next hearing scheduled for September 10, 2026.
- Who
- The Madras High Court, Tamil Nadu’s Director General of Police, the Salem Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption office, and Sub-Inspector A Saravanakumar.
- What
- The court directed the DGP to explain why CCTV footage was reportedly retained for 15 days instead of the required 18 months.
- When
- The order was dated September 2, and the next hearing is scheduled for September 10, 2026. The requested footage covered September 15 to October 15, 2025.
- Where
- Police stations across Tamil Nadu, including the Salem DVAC office.
- Why
- The explanation was sought after a petition requested preservation of CCTV footage and mobile-phone records connected with a corruption investigation.
Court and Petitioner’s Position
Police Administration’s Explanation Pending
CCTV retention period
Court and Petitioner’s Position
The petitioner’s counsel cited the Supreme Court’s 18-month preservation requirement and argued that Tamil Nadu had assured the courts it would follow it.
Police Administration’s Explanation Pending
The Additional Public Prosecutor said the relevant digital video recording systems retained data for only 15 days and agreed to obtain an explanation from the DGP.
Possible breach of court directions
Court and Petitioner’s Position
The High Court said even a one-minute shortfall would constitute a breach of the Supreme Court’s order.
Police Administration’s Explanation Pending
The DGP has been asked to clarify why the DVAC system had a shorter retention period and what period applies across Tamil Nadu police stations.
- Court
- Madras High Court
- Preservation requirement
- 18 months under the Supreme Court’s directions, as cited in the proceedings
- Reported retention period
- 15 days at the Salem DVAC office
- Petitioner
- A Saravanakumar, a Sub-Inspector and Accused No. 2 in the case
- Investigation agency
- Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption
- Requested footage period
- September 15 to October 15, 2025
- Next hearing
- September 10, 2026