In a significant ruling that questions police evidence collection methods, a Chandigarh court has acquitted a man accused of assaulting police personnel, highlighting serious lapses in the prosecution's case including damaged equipment and missing electronic records.
Compromised Evidence Leads to Case Collapse
The court noted that the police presented torn jackets as evidence of assault but failed to provide any video footage from body-worn cameras that could have substantiated their claims. The prosecution's case unraveled when it was revealed that the body cameras meant to record the incident were either broken or malfunctioning at the crucial time.
Judicial Scrutiny of Police Procedures
Additional Sessions Judge Sarju Pandit observed that the absence of electronic evidence from body cameras raised serious doubts about the prosecution's version of events. The court emphasized that when police departments invest in modern equipment like body cameras, they must ensure proper maintenance and functionality, especially during field operations.
The torn police jackets, presented as primary evidence, were deemed insufficient without corroborating video proof, especially when the technology to record such incidents was available but reportedly non-functional.
Broader Implications for Police Accountability
This case highlights growing concerns about:
- Proper maintenance of police equipment
- Transparency in law enforcement operations
- Judicial scrutiny of evidence quality
- Accountability mechanisms within police forces
The acquittal serves as a reminder that courts are increasingly demanding higher standards of evidence, particularly when modern recording equipment is involved but fails to produce relevant documentation.
