E-Paper
Sharing Google location can’t be ground for granting bail, says SC
A location pin was not only likely to infringe the individual’s right to privacy but could also be misused, the bench said
Dropping a Google Maps pin cannot be a condition of granting bail, the Supreme Court said on Monday, indicating it will soon pass a judgment that will end the practice of an accused constantly providing investigators information with about their whereabouts.
According to a bench of justices AS Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, a location pin was not only likely to infringe the individual’s right to privacy but could also be misused.
“Ultimately, it’s technology. We don’t know how it will be used. But this condition should not be imposed. It (Google Maps pin) can’t be a condition of bail. We are going to say that in our judgment,” the bench observed.
The bench said that various courts, including different benches of the Supreme Court, have been putting the sharing of Google Maps pins as a condition of bail, and it is time for the top court to deliver an authoritative ruling on the issue.
During the hearing, the bench emphasised Google India’s submissions that a pin is “innocuous” due to its primary function as a tool for navigation or location identification, and that it may not effectively monitor an individual’s compliance with bail terms.
“Even Google says it’s innocuous... Why put this condition at all? We will say that no such condition can be put while granting bail,” said the bench, reserving its judgment in the matter.
The apex court’s decision to examine the issue comes amid a recent trend when several bail orders mandate that bail seekers share their location with law enforcement authorities. Given the widespread use of GPS-enabled smartphones, courts across the country have been including sharing of mobile location as one of the conditions of bail.
The bench was hearing a petition against an order of bail granted by the Delhi high court to a Nigerian national, an accused in a case registered under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act.
Additional solicitor general (ASG) Vikramjeet Banerjee appeared on behalf of the Centre in the matter while senior counsel Vinay Navare assisted it as amicus curie. Advocate Varun Mishra represented the accused in the case.
The high court, in its May 2022 order, put two stringent conditions – one, the accused shall drop a pin on Google Maps to ensure that their location is available to the investigation officer of the case; and second, the high commission of Nigeria must place on record an assurance that the accused shall not leave the country and will appear before the trial court as and when required.
During a hearing in the matter last year, the top court took umbrage at both these conditions, observing that the condition of sharing a Google Maps pin may prima facie affect privacy rights of the accused under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It remarked in July 2023 that once an accused has been set at liberty following the imposition of certain reasonable conditions, it may not be appropriate to track their movements at the expense of the right to privacy.
Subsequently, in August 2023, it directed the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (Meity) to file an affidavit elaborating the technical aspects and consequences of the dropping of a Google Maps pin, adding the Centre’s affidavit must incorporate a comprehensive view from an expert.
Meity filed its affidavit in February but failed to elucidate on technical aspects of and the information about a person that may get tracked when they drop a location pin in Google Maps. It suggested the apex court should seek all the details from Google India Pvt Ltd, which, it said, would be better placed to apprise the bench of the technology behind a Google Maps pin and the ambit of surveillance.
Accordingly, the court asked Google India to explain the technical aspects of dropping a pin by filing an affidavit. The court also set aside the two stringent conditions and granted interim bail to the accused in the case.
