‘Device seizure norms after talks with states’

DELHI: Asserting that search and seizure of digital devices during probes “further legitimate state interest” and cannot be said to be violating privacy rights, the Union government has told the Supreme Court that common guidelines on preservation and handling of information stored on digital devices confiscated by investigating agencies across the country will require a consultation involving all states.

The Centre, submitting its affidavit in the top court, also said that it would be inappropriate to pass any blanket order regarding return of digital devices to persons under investigation “considering the exigencies of the investigation and the varying degrees of sensitivity of the data and the stage of investigation which may arise in each case”.

It pointed out that the person concerned must approach the competent trial court to either seek cloned images of the hard drive of the devices which have been seized or return of the device.

The affidavit was filed on Friday in response to a public interest litigation filed by former professor of Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) Ram Ramaswamy and four other academics who demanded that guidelines be framed for investigating agencies regarding search, seizure, examination and preservation of digital and electronic devices and their contents.

In response, the ministry of home affairs (MHA) had in November last year filed an affidavit emphasising that the PIL is not maintainable since it does not refer to specific instances or involves live issues. The ministry had at the time also added that evidence of crime in the contemporary world is largely stored in mobile phones, laptops, tablets and such electronic devices and no accused can claim right to privacy in respect of such devices.

However, when this affidavit came up before a bench led by justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul in August this year, the court remained dissatisfied with the Centre’s response, and directed it to submit a fresh affidavit after taking into account various academic materials and international conventions provided by the petitioners.

Filing the new affidavit, the MHA said that good international practises could be adopted or adjusted to the Indian context, keeping in view the nature of crime, modus operandi of criminals and the procedural law within the constitutional boundaries, but it would necessitate