Supreme Court Questions Bail Condition on Location Sharing

The Supreme Court questions Google location sharing in bail conditions, citing privacy concerns, during a case involving money laundering.

By Advocate Suresh Tripathi |Published: 2023-10-04

The Supreme Court made an initial observation, suggesting that a bail condition requiring an accused person to share their Google location with the relevant Investigation Officer during the entire duration of their bail appears to infringe upon their right to privacy. This comment came during a hearing of the Enforcement Directorate's challenge against a Delhi High Court decision to grant bail to the internal auditor of Shakti Bhog Foods Limited (SBFL) in a money laundering case related to a significant bank loan fraud.

The Court is slated to examine whether the bail condition set by the Delhi High Court, which mandates the accused to regularly share their Google location with the Investigation Officer throughout their bail period, is permissible under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Justice Oka expressed concerns about the practical implications of such a condition and raised doubts about its potential violation of the right to privacy. He questioned the Enforcement Directorate's representative, Adv. Zoheb Hussain, about the necessity of tracking the accused's movements after being granted bail.

Hussain argued that this condition is simply a technological adaptation of the requirement for individuals on bail to report to authorities regularly, as was done in the past. However, Justice Oka countered that tracking an individual's movements was fundamentally different from previous reporting requirements.

The ED's counsel also cited the Puttuswamy case, where the Supreme Court allowed some infringements on the right to privacy for the sake of crime prevention. Nevertheless, Justice Oka pointed out that the issue at hand was not considered in the Puttuswamy case.

The matter has been scheduled for further consideration on December 12th. The Court had previously decided to assess the constitutional validity of this particular bail condition.

The bail condition imposed by the Delhi High Court, which the Supreme Court will evaluate, is as follows:

“The applicant shall regularly share their Google location from their mobile phone with the concerned Investigation Officer, and this location-sharing shall remain active throughout the bail period.”

In the case at hand, an FIR was filed due to financial irregularities and fund diversion related to credit facilities obtained by SBFL from a consortium of banks, with the SBI at the forefront, resulting in an estimated loss of Rs. 3269.42 crores. The respondent's argument is that he was not named as an accused in the FIR, and he was not serving as the internal auditor of SBFL during the period under investigation.

The Delhi High Court had allowed the CBI to continue its investigation but granted bail to the applicant with specific conditions, including the one related to sharing Google location.