New Delhi: Chief Justice of India (CJI), D.Y. Chandrachud, has called on investigating agencies to maintain a delicate balance while exercising search and seizure powers and that of individuals’ right to privacy. He disapproved of “unwarranted” confiscation of personal devices during raids.
According to Livelaw.in, the CJI said, “In the realm of criminal justice, the delicate balance between search and seizure powers and individual privacy rights stands at the cornerstone of a fair and just society. At the heart of this balance lies the need to uphold due process while ensuring the effective functioning of law enforcement agencies.”
He continued, “Instances of raids conducted and incidents of unwarranted confiscation of personal devices highlight the pressing need to strike a balance between investigative imperatives and individual privacy rights.”
The top judge made the observations while delivering the 20th DP Kohli Memorial Lecture on “Adopting Technology to Advance Criminal Justice”. The lecture was organised by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in memory of its first director.
He also referred to a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by the Foundation for Media Professionals, which sought guidelines for the seizure of personal electronic devices by investigating agencies. The Supreme Court had, at that time, instructed the Union government agencies to comply with the 2020 CBI (Crime) Manual on Digital Evidence till new and formal guidelines are brought in.
The CBI Manual in question mandates the provision of hash values for confiscated digital devices – akin to electronic fingerprints under the Information Technology Act – to safeguard integrity.
“The CBI Manual mandates the provision of hash values for confiscated digital devices like mobile phones and laptops during investigations. Hash values, akin to electronic fingerprints, are generated under the Information Technology Act to safeguard the integrity of seized electronic devices. Additionally, the manual mandates the creation of an image of seized electronic documents at the time of seizure, further safeguarding against tampering or manipulation,” the CJI explained.
