38.6c New Delhi, India, Friday, May 15, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

Bombay HC: Installation of CCTV Cameras is illegal without Owners Consent.

By LawStreet News Network      18 June, 2018 12:00 AM      3 Comments

The Bombay High Court has held that installation of CCTV cameras outside somebodys flat or residence without their permission to monitor their movements is a violation of privacy.

A petition was moved by a senior citizen, Farhad Ginwalla, and his three children Rustom, Rashna, and Chherie against Farhads daughter Zenobia Poonawala. Farhads wife, late Pervin, was the owner of the building, Rutton Manor, on Garden Road in Colaba.

According to petitioners, a flat on the ground floor is co-owned by Zenobia, while flats on the first and second floors are occupied by Rustom. A flat on the third floor is used by Farhad while the fourth floor belongs to Rashna. But according to the petitioners, the fourth floor flat is illegally occupied by Zenobia. They further alleged that the common building terrace, accessible through a passage on the fourth floor, has been locked by Zenobia.

Justice SJ Kathawalla was hearing a notice of motion in a suit filed by Farhad Ginwalla along with his son and two daughters seeking urgent interim relief from Farhads third daughter Zenobia, who along with her husband is the defendant in the suit.

During the argument, a report was submitted by the petitioners. Chirag Dhakaan, of Span Systems, which installed the CCTV system in the building, said the CCTVs installed on the left side of the three floors in Rutton Manor are capable of recording people entering and exiting Flats 4, 5, 6 and 8. Dhakaan, in his report, suggested the best locations to install CCTVs at Rutton Manor, which would take care of the security in a minimally intrusive manner.

Justice S J Kathawalla suggested that the CCTV cameras be installed as suggested by Span Systems. But Zenobias lawyer told the court that CCTV cameras were installed after an incident on March 24 when an unknown person had tried to open her flats door.

When the court sought an explanation from Zenobia for such behavior, she said that she was doing it as the plaintiffs were in breach of an order of Small Causes Court as they had inducted third parties as tenants into Rutton Manor.

After hearing both the parties the court held that the defendant is not allowed to install CCTV cameras, they can do so only on their own floor, where they reside. Moreover, the court directed the defendants to allow plaintiffs the access to the common roof and in case of non-compliance, directed the lawyers to intervene and resolve the problem.



Share this article:

User Avatar
About:


John Doe
CCCTV Camera Installation Sep 01, 2022

Privacy Rules, 2020 also prohibits the use of CCTV footage for public or commercial purposes. Following the Electronic Transactions Act, anybody who uses a CCTV camera in violation of the law faces legal consequences. https://security360.pk/

John Doe
CCTV Camera Services Jun 28, 2022

Your article post is so informative about security camera installation. there is no permission required for installing CCTV at your premises, however, if you are a resident of a complex then you may intimate the society and/or the maintenance committee for the same, however the same is also not mandatory which please note. https://hikvisionpakistan.pk/ Thanks for sharing this article.

John Doe
cctv installation Aug 12, 2020

CCTV is using for protecting property . But lack of maintenance would be occur cctv connection lost problem. But if the user know the using guide of cctv camera then problem would be solve.

Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS

no-offence-under-sc-st-act-if-alleged-casteist-abuse-occurred-inside-private-house-sc
Trending Judiciary
No Offence Under SC/ST Act If Alleged Casteist Abuse Occurred Inside Private House: SC [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court rules SC/ST Act offence is not made out if alleged casteist abuse occurred inside a private house without public view.

14 May, 2026 03:16 PM
madras-hc-bars-tiruppattur-mla-from-floor-test-over-disputed-one-vote-victory
Trending Judiciary
Madras HC Bars Tiruppattur MLA From Floor Test Over Disputed One-Vote Victory [Read Order]

Madras High Court restrains Tiruppattur MLA from floor test participation over disputed one-vote victory and alleged electoral irregularities.

14 May, 2026 03:24 PM

TOP STORIES

delhi-hc-refers-to-larger-bench-issue-on-stage-of-hearing-accused-under-section-223-bnss-before-cognizance
Trending Judiciary
Delhi HC Refers to Larger Bench Issue on Stage of Hearing Accused Under Section 223 BNSS Before Cognizance [Read Judgment]

Delhi High Court refers to Larger Bench issue on when accused must be heard under Section 223 BNSS before taking cognizance.

09 May, 2026 10:25 AM
hymen-intact-does-not-mean-no-penetration-delhi-high-court-upholds-pocso-conviction-of-tenant-who-raped-six-year-old-girl
Trending Judiciary
‘Hymen Intact Does Not Mean No Penetration’: Delhi High Court Upholds POCSO Conviction of Tenant Who Raped Six-Year-Old Girl [Read Order]

Delhi High Court upheld a tenant’s POCSO conviction for raping a six-year-old girl, holding that an intact hymen does not negate penetration.

09 May, 2026 12:42 PM
consumer-commission-directs-bus-operator-to-pay-50000-compensation-after-barat-reaches-wedding-destination-at-3-am-due-to-breakdown
Trending Judiciary
Consumer Commission Directs Bus Operator to Pay ₹50,000 Compensation After Barat Reaches Wedding Destination at 3 AM Due to Breakdown [Read Order]

Delhi Consumer Commission ordered a bus operator to pay ₹50,000 compensation after a Barat reached the wedding venue at 3 AM due to breakdown.

09 May, 2026 01:56 PM
sabarimala-reference-day-13-can-faith-justify-civil-death-and-genital-cutting-of-children-sc-bench-examines-religions-reach-over-the-body
Trending Judiciary
Sabarimala Reference Day 13: “Can Faith Justify Civil Death and Genital Cutting of Children?”: SC Bench Examines Religion’s Reach Over the Body

SC’s nine-judge bench examined whether religious practices violating dignity, bodily autonomy and conscience can claim protection under Article 26.

09 May, 2026 02:25 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email