Case Note & Summary
The appellant, a Nigerian national, was arrested on 21st May 2014 for offences under Sections 8, 22, 23, and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act). On 31st May 2022, the Special Judge granted bail subject to conditions including a certificate of assurance from the High Commission of Nigeria that the accused would not leave the country, and a requirement to drop a PIN on Google Maps to share location with the investigation officer. The appellant challenged these conditions before the Supreme Court. The court examined two issues: whether the embassy certificate condition is workable and whether the GPS tracking condition violates Article 21. The court noted that the condition of embassy certificate, derived from Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee v. Union of India (1994) 6 SCC 731, is unworkable as embassies may not provide such assurances. The court also held that the GPS tracking condition infringes the right to privacy under Article 21, as it amounts to continuous surveillance without adequate safeguards. The court modified the bail conditions, directing that the appellant's passport be impounded, he report to the police station periodically, and provide his local address. The court emphasized that bail conditions must be reasonable and proportionate, and courts have discretion under Section 439 CrPC to impose alternative conditions.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Bail Conditions - Foreign Accused - Certificate of Assurance - The condition requiring a certificate of assurance from the Embassy/High Commission of the country to which the foreigner-accused belongs, as per clause (iv) of Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee v. Union of India (1994) 6 SCC 731, is unworkable as embassies may not provide such assurances. The court held that alternative conditions such as impounding passport, reporting to police, and providing local address are sufficient. (Paras 2-10) B) Constitutional Law - Right to Privacy - GPS Tracking - Article 21 - The condition requiring the accused to drop a PIN on Google Maps to share their location with the investigation officer violates the right to privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution. The court held that such continuous surveillance is disproportionate and not necessary for securing the presence of the accused. (Paras 11-15) C) Narcotic Drugs - Bail - Section 37 NDPS Act - Conditions - The court clarified that while Section 37 imposes stringent conditions for bail in NDPS cases, the court has discretion to impose reasonable conditions under Section 439 CrPC. The conditions must be tailored to ensure the accused's presence and prevent tampering, without infringing fundamental rights. (Paras 4-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the condition requiring a certificate of assurance from the Embassy/High Commission of a foreign accused is workable and whether the condition of dropping a PIN on Google Maps violates Article 21 of the Constitution of India
Final Decision
The Supreme Court modified the bail conditions, deleting the requirement of embassy certificate and GPS tracking. Directed that the appellant's passport be impounded, he report to the police station periodically, and provide his local address. The court held that the condition of embassy certificate is unworkable and the GPS tracking condition violates Article 21.
Law Points
- Bail conditions must be reasonable and not violate fundamental rights
- Embassy/High Commission certificate of assurance is unworkable
- GPS tracking condition violates right to privacy under Article 21
- Courts have power to impose alternative conditions under Section 439 CrPC
