New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday held that bail conditions that allow an investigating agency to continuously track the movements of an accused violate the right to privacy guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.
A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, which removed a bail condition imposed on Nigerian national Frank Vitus in a drugs case that required him to place a PIN on Google map to ensure his location was available for the investigating officer of the case, said that this court has held that bail conditions cannot be "fanciful, arbitrary or extravagant".
The court said: "The investigating agency cannot be allowed to continuously spy on the private life of the accused extended bail, imposing arbitrary conditions, as that would violate the right to privacy of the accused, guaranteed by Article 21." It said yes constant surveillance is maintained on every movement of the accused on bail through the use of technology or otherwise, the rights of the accused guaranteed under Article 21, including the right to privacy, will be infringed.
"The reason is that the effect of maintaining constant surveillance on the accused by imposing drastic bail conditions will be tantamount to keeping the accused in some form of confinement even after he has been released on bail. Such a condition cannot be a condition of bail." He said.
The court said that imposing any bail condition allowing the police/investigation agency to track every movement of the accused released on bail by using any technology or otherwise would certainly violate the right to privacy guaranteed under the article 21."In this case, the condition of leaving a PIN on Google Maps has been incorporated without even considering the technical effect of leaving a PIN and the relevance of such a condition as a condition of bail. This cannot be a condition of bail. on bail. The condition deserves to be removed and ordered accordingly," he said.
The court said that in the present case it is a case of the accused whose guilt has not yet been established and until he is found guilty, the presumption of innocence applies.
"He cannot be deprived of all the rights guaranteed to him by Article 21. The courts must show restraint in imposing bail conditions. Therefore, when granting bail, the courts can only restrict the freedom of the accused to the extent necessary to impose bail conditions justified by law," the court said in its order, which was reserved on April 29. Stressing that bail conditions cannot be as onerous as To frustrate the bail order itself, the court said the court can impose a condition of reporting regularly to the police station or court or not traveling abroad without prior permission.
"Where circumstances so require, the court may impose a condition preventing the accused from entering a particular area to protect prosecution witnesses or victims. But the court may not impose a condition on the accused to keep the police constantly informed. about his movements from one place to another. The purpose of the bail condition cannot be to maintain constant surveillance over the movements of the accused on bail," he said.
The high court said that the accused is subject to the conditions imposed while granting bail and if, after the bail has been extended, he violates the bail conditions or commits any offence, the courts always have the power to cancel the bail. bail."No condition can be imposed while granting bail which is impossible for the accused to comply with. If such a condition is imposed, it will deprive the accused of bail although he is otherwise entitled to it," he said .
He added that the objective of imposing bail conditions is to ensure that the accused does not interfere with or obstruct the investigation in any way, remains available for investigation, does not tamper with or destroy evidence, does not commit any crime and remains regularly present. before the court of first instance, and he does not create obstacles to the prompt conclusion of the trial.
"The courts have imposed a condition that the accused cooperate with the investigation when granted bail before submitting the final report or charge sheet. Cooperating with the investigation does not mean that the accused has to confess," he said, adding that bail conditions must be consistent with the aim of imposing conditions. While bail conditions are imposed, the constitutional rights of an accused, who is ordered released on bail, can only be restricted to the extent minimum required, he stated.
"Even an accused convicted by a competent court and serving a prison sentence is not deprived of all the rights guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution," the court noted.
The top court also removed another condition imposed on Victus by the Delhi High Court that he will have to obtain a certificate from the Nigerian Embassy/High Commission that he will not leave the country and will have to appear before the court when required in the Law Case. of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances.Victus was arrested on May 21, 2014 in the case and was released on bail on May 31, 2022 subject to various terms and conditions incorporated in the said order.
He moved the high court challenging the two conditions imposed by the high court: sharing Google PIN location with the investigating officer and obtaining a certificate from the embassy.
A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, which removed a bail condition imposed on Nigerian national Frank Vitus in a drugs case that required him to place a PIN on Google map to ensure his location was available for the investigating officer of the case, said that this court has held that bail conditions cannot be "fanciful, arbitrary or extravagant".
The court said: "The investigating agency cannot be allowed to continuously spy on the private life of the accused extended bail, imposing arbitrary conditions, as that would violate the right to privacy of the accused, guaranteed by Article 21." It said yes constant surveillance is maintained on every movement of the accused on bail through the use of technology or otherwise, the rights of the accused guaranteed under Article 21, including the right to privacy, will be infringed.
"The reason is that the effect of maintaining constant surveillance on the accused by imposing drastic bail conditions will be tantamount to keeping the accused in some form of confinement even after he has been released on bail. Such a condition cannot be a condition of bail." He said.
The court said that imposing any bail condition allowing the police/investigation agency to track every movement of the accused released on bail by using any technology or otherwise would certainly violate the right to privacy guaranteed under the article 21."In this case, the condition of leaving a PIN on Google Maps has been incorporated without even considering the technical effect of leaving a PIN and the relevance of such a condition as a condition of bail. This cannot be a condition of bail. on bail. The condition deserves to be removed and ordered accordingly," he said.
The court said that in the present case it is a case of the accused whose guilt has not yet been established and until he is found guilty, the presumption of innocence applies.
"He cannot be deprived of all the rights guaranteed to him by Article 21. The courts must show restraint in imposing bail conditions. Therefore, when granting bail, the courts can only restrict the freedom of the accused to the extent necessary to impose bail conditions justified by law," the court said in its order, which was reserved on April 29. Stressing that bail conditions cannot be as onerous as To frustrate the bail order itself, the court said the court can impose a condition of reporting regularly to the police station or court or not traveling abroad without prior permission.
"Where circumstances so require, the court may impose a condition preventing the accused from entering a particular area to protect prosecution witnesses or victims. But the court may not impose a condition on the accused to keep the police constantly informed. about his movements from one place to another. The purpose of the bail condition cannot be to maintain constant surveillance over the movements of the accused on bail," he said.
The high court said that the accused is subject to the conditions imposed while granting bail and if, after the bail has been extended, he violates the bail conditions or commits any offence, the courts always have the power to cancel the bail. bail."No condition can be imposed while granting bail which is impossible for the accused to comply with. If such a condition is imposed, it will deprive the accused of bail although he is otherwise entitled to it," he said .
He added that the objective of imposing bail conditions is to ensure that the accused does not interfere with or obstruct the investigation in any way, remains available for investigation, does not tamper with or destroy evidence, does not commit any crime and remains regularly present. before the court of first instance, and he does not create obstacles to the prompt conclusion of the trial.
"The courts have imposed a condition that the accused cooperate with the investigation when granted bail before submitting the final report or charge sheet. Cooperating with the investigation does not mean that the accused has to confess," he said, adding that bail conditions must be consistent with the aim of imposing conditions. While bail conditions are imposed, the constitutional rights of an accused, who is ordered released on bail, can only be restricted to the extent minimum required, he stated.
"Even an accused convicted by a competent court and serving a prison sentence is not deprived of all the rights guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution," the court noted.
The top court also removed another condition imposed on Victus by the Delhi High Court that he will have to obtain a certificate from the Nigerian Embassy/High Commission that he will not leave the country and will have to appear before the court when required in the Law Case. of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances.Victus was arrested on May 21, 2014 in the case and was released on bail on May 31, 2022 subject to various terms and conditions incorporated in the said order.
He moved the high court challenging the two conditions imposed by the high court: sharing Google PIN location with the investigating officer and obtaining a certificate from the embassy.
