New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday held that there cannot be a bail condition that enables the police to constantly track the movements of the accused and virtually peep into the privacy of the accused.
A bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan was examining whether a bail condition requiring an accused to drop a pin on Google Maps for the investigating officer to access his location violates a person’s right to privacy.
The Court, as reported by Live Law, set aside the bail condition requiring the accused to share the Google Maps PIN in his mobile device with the investigating officer.
“There can’t be bail condition defeating the very objective of bail. There can’t be a bail condition enabling the police to constantly track the movement of the accused and virtually peep into the private life of the accused,” Justice Oka verbally pronounced the verdict.
The court also relaxed a bail condition that required the foreign accused to obtain an assurance from his Embassy that they would not leave India. The bench said that there cannot be bail conditions that defeat the purpose of granting bail.
The court was dealing with a special leave to appeal petition against the Delhi High Court’s conditions for granting interim bail to Frank Vitus, a Nigerian national accused in a drugs case.
In 2022, the High Court had ordered the accused and a co-accused to place a pin on Google Maps so their whereabouts would be visible to the Investigating Officer. Additionally, the High Court had directed the accused to obtain a certificate from the Nigerian High Commission confirming they would not leave India and would appear before the trial court.
While hearing the matter, the Supreme Court had asked Google India to explain the functioning of Google PIN in the context of bail conditions requiring the accused to share their live mobile location.
After excusing Google India from this explanation, the court directed Google LLC to clarify the workings of Google PIN. On April 29, after reviewing the affidavit from Google LLC, Justice Oka found it “superfluous”. He also remarked that this bail condition is hit by Article 21 of the Constitution.
Additional Solicitor General Vikramjeet Banerjee for the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) argued that such a condition helps share the live location of the accused. However, Justice Oka disagreed, emphasizing that it cannot be a bail condition, even if it has been used in two instances by the court.
The court considered two main issues: whether an accused must share the Google PIN location with the investigating officer as a bail condition, and whether bail to a foreign accused can be conditioned on obtaining an assurance from their Embassy that they will not leave India.
