In a significant order reinforcing the right to privacy, the Delhi High Court has set aside a bail condition that required an accused to continuously share his live location with the Investigating Officer through Google services. Justice Vikas Mahajan held that such a requirement was neither legally justified nor compatible with constitutional safeguards.
The petitioner had approached the Court seeking modification of the condition, arguing that round-the-clock digital tracking was excessive, intrusive, and lacked statutory backing. Accepting these concerns, the Court observed that no bail condition can assume the form of surveillance under the guise of ensuring the accused’s presence during investigation.
While deleting the condition, the High Court placed reliance on the Supreme Court’s 2024 decision in Frank Vitus v. NCB, where the apex court unequivocally held that technology-enabled tracking of an accused person violates Article 21. The Supreme Court had emphasised that privacy remains an essential facet of personal liberty and that investigative needs cannot justify constant monitoring of an individual on bail.
Referring to the binding precedent, the High Court underscored that the purpose of bail is not to subject an accused to perpetual scrutiny or to keep them under a “virtual confinement.” The Apex Court had already clarified that requiring an accused to continuously inform the police about their movements, or permitting investigative agencies to intrude into their private life through digital tools, is impermissible.
By removing the contested condition, the Court reaffirmed that bail terms must remain reasonable, proportionate, and aligned with constitutional protections, particularly when they touch upon the fundamental right to privacy.
Disclaimer: This news/ article includes information received via a syndicated news feed. The original rights remain with the respective publisher.
Picture Source :
