Supreme Court Strikes Down Privacy-Infringing Bail Condition

The Supreme Court has declared that bail conditions allowing police to track an accused's location using Google Maps violate the right to privacy. This judgment came in response to a case involving a Nigerian national. The ruling underscores that such conditions defeat the very purpose of bail itself.

The Supreme Court ruled on Monday against bail conditions that enable police to intrude into the private lives of individuals in criminal cases. A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan overturned a Delhi High Court mandate that required a Nigerian national involved in a drugs case to share his Google Maps pin location with investigators.

Justice Oka stated, "There cannot be a bail condition defeating the very objective of bail itself. We have said Google pin cannot be a bail condition. There can't be a bail condition enabling the police to constantly track the movement of the accused. Police cannot be allowed to peep into the private life of the accused on bail." The verdict was pronounced in response to a plea by Frank Vitus, challenging this bail condition.

The ruling aligns with a landmark decision from a nine-judge Constitution bench on August 24, 2017, which declared the right to privacy as a fundamental right under the Constitution. The Supreme Court highlighted that the bail condition in question appeared to violate this fundamental right.

The court also noted similar bail conditions imposed on other accused in different cases and emphasized that such practices could not be justified under the Indian legal framework.

In a related instance, on February 8, the Delhi High Court imposed similar bail conditions on Raman Bhuraria, arrested in connection with money laundering linked to a Rs 3,269 crore financial irregularity case involving Shakti Bhog Foods Ltd.

(With inputs from agencies.)