Tracking accused on bail by agency violate right to privacy: Supreme Court

Noting that the guilt of the accused Frank Vitus is yet to be established, the court said “so long as he is not held guilty, the presumption of innocence is applicable. He cannot be deprived of all his rights guaranteed under Article 21”.

The SC said that while a court may impose a condition of periodically reporting to the police station/court or not travelling abroad without prior permission, it “cannot impose a condition on the accused to keep the police constantly informed about his movement from one place to another… The investigating agency cannot be permitted to continuously peep into the private life of the accused enlarged on bail, by imposing arbitrary conditions since that will violate the right of privacy of the accused as guaranteed by Article 21”.

The judgement said that the effect of keeping a constant vigil on the accused “by imposing drastic bail conditions will amount to keeping the accused in some kind of confinement even after he is released on bail. Such a condition cannot be a condition of bail.”

The bench said that Google LLC had informed that a user has full control over sharing PINs and it does not impinge on the user’s privacy, as the user retains full control. The company also said that the PIN location does not enable real time tracking of the user or the user’s device. “Therefore, the condition of the accused dropping a pin on Google Maps, as it stands, is completely redundant as the same does not help the NCB,” the court said.

The court also deleted the condition requiring the accused to furnish a certificate of assurance from the High Commission that he will not leave the country and shall appear before the Special Judge as and when required.