The Allahabad High Court has directed the Director General of Police (DGP) of Uttar Pradesh to consider making audio-video recording of witness statements under Section 180 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) mandatory in all criminal cases [Smt Chandrakanta v. State of UP]
Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal said that the Court had come across a number of cases where the investigating officers chose not to record audio-video statements of the witnesses to save themselves from the allegation that they themselves had authored these statements.
Section 180(3) of the BNSS states that the investigating officer may also record the statement of witnesses by audio-video electronic means.
In the order passed on September 15, the Court noted that the DGP in July 2025 had issued a circular mandating recording of audio-video statements of rape victims. However, the preparation of audio-video recordings of the witness statements in other cases was made optional. The Court said that this option was being misused by several investigating officers.
"This Court directs the DGP, U.P. to consider, making it mandatory to prepare audio-video of statements recorded under Section 180 BNSS, so as to make the investigation more transparent and fair and same would also be helpful to the Court while deciding the bail application and other judicial proceedings."
The Court made these observations while dealing with a bail application in a dowry death case. Agra Police had chosen not to record the audio-video statements of the first informant in the case.
Highlighting the importance of recording witness statements in digital format, the Court said that nowadays, it has become a tendency to falsely implicate people in certain type of cases like those involving demand of dowry, dowry death, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act cases and Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) (SC/ST Act) cases.
It stressed that an investigating officer must collect evidence fairly to bring out the real culprit before the court of competent jurisdiction. Initiation of criminal proceedings itself should not be allowed to be a mode to harass innocent persons on the part of the complainant, the Bench said.
In order to improve police investigations, the Court issued following directions:
1. Investigating officer should rush to the place of incident of a cognizable offence and record the statement of first informant and other witnesses as expeditiously as possible without any delay. Audio-video of statement should also be prepared preferably with E-Sakshya App and same should be available to the concerned court on its demand.
2. Investigating officer should also try to record the statement of independent witnesses to extract the truth regarding the incident in question.
3. In cases of rape and sexual assault, the statement of the victim should be recorded at her place of residence or as per her convenience by a woman police officer. In such cases, the victim should be sent for medical examination with her consent within 24 hours from the time of receiving information.
4. Where the offence is punishable with imprisonment for 10 years or more and in case of offence of rape or sexual assault, the victim should be produced before the magistrate to record her statement as soon as commission of offence is brought to notice to the police.
5. Where there is an allegation making obscene videos, the investigating officer should collect the mobile phone of the accused and, if required, the same should be sent to the forensic science laboratory (FSL) to retrieve the data. If there is an allegation of making viral any obscene video of the victim, assistance of Cyber Cell and FSL should also be taken.
6. Where the location of the accused or any other person as well as conversation with another person is relevant, the call detail record (CDR) of the mobile phone of that person should also be collected to extract the truth.
7. Where the victim does not know the accused but only recognises him, a test identification parade must be conducted as per the procedure mentioned in para 116 of UP Police Regulation.
8. Identification of recovered property from the suspect should be conducted as per the procedure mentioned in para 117 of the UP Police Regulation - -mixing the recovered property with other articles of similar nature before conducting the identification of property.
The Court directed the DGP to inform the investigating officers about these guidelines so that the real culprits may be brought to justice and any innocent person may not be subjected to harassment.
Advocate Himanshu Mishra represented the petitioner.
Advocate Virendra Kumar Srivastava represented the complainant.
Additional Government Advocate DPS Chauhan appeared for the State.
[Read Order]