The Supreme Court notified the Center of the petition of one journalist.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday notified the center of a petition by a group of journalists seeking guidance on the search and seizure of digital devices.
The court also tagged the petition with other similar issues.
This directive was passed by Judges KM Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy.
The court was hearing an appeal filed by the Foundation for Media Professionals through advocate Rahul Narayan.
In its petition, the Journalists Association raised the same issue that today’s digital devices, especially personal devices such as cell phones and laptops, can contain and find more sensitive personal data about individuals than physical spaces such as homes or safes. It is almost always with a person and effectively an extension of the ego.
“Even if it is assumed that the existing legal provisions across general and special laws apply in the context of the digital realm from the simple production/confiscation of devices to the production/retrieval of their contents, the existing legal provisions are not enforced under the Criminal Procedure Act of 1973 or various special laws. It is not sufficient to allow institutions to exercise their powers in a manner consistent with their fundamental right to privacy.”
The petitioner states that state agencies seek to justify these practices by exercising their powers to coerce the production of goods or conduct search and seizure operations during investigations or investigations, and that these practices are in violation of the fundamental right to privacy inherent in Article 21 of the Act. Submitted. Constitution and other constitutional provisions.
The petitioner urged the Supreme Court to declare that the contents of the arrest/defendant’s digital devices and passwords/passwords/biometric IDs are protected by guarantees against compulsion in accordance with Article 20(3) of the Constitution of India. .
The petitioner also urged the courts to declare that the current search and seizure legal system does not address the search, seizure and access to the contents of an individual’s personal digital devices.
Alternatively, the petitioner said, the existing legal system violates the basic right to privacy under the Indian Constitution to the extent that it applies to the search, seizure and access to the contents of an individual’s personal digital device, the petitioner said.
The petitioner also passed an appropriate order directing the Union of India to draft a model law to be enacted by the State in relation to the search and seizure of digital devices and the investigation of their contents in accordance with the fundamental rights guaranteed under Part 3 of the Constitution of the Commonwealth of India. i was trying to do India as interpreted by the Supreme Court.
The petition also issues appropriate guidance to fill the void until legislation is passed, including that law enforcement agencies cannot seek access to an individual’s digital device without applying and obtaining a prior judicial warrant except in emergency situations. I was going to do it. Such a warrant must be obtained and granted within 48 hours of the search, otherwise the search will be deemed unconstitutional and material obtained therefrom will not be admissible as evidence.