NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday expressed its displeasure over the Central government’s lackadaisical attitude in framing guidelines that the police and Central agencies should adhere to, during the search and seizure of personal digital devices of accused persons.
“What have you (the Centre) done so far? It has been more than two years since this particular Public Interest Litigation (PIL),” asked a two-judge bench headed by Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and also comprising Sudhanshu Dhulia.
The bench made the remarks while hearing a PIL filed by the Foundation for Media Professionals (FMP). The FMP requested the court to establish safeguards and create a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) against any kind of unreasonable interference by law enforcement agencies.
The FMP also sought a direction from SC to the concerned authorities and probe agencies, to create comprehensive guidelines for search and seizure of digital devices. During the course of the hearing, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) V Raju, appearing for the Union of India, told the top court that a committee has been formed, and the Central government would require more time to formulate the guidelines.
He also assured the Supreme Court that the guidelines will be framed soon to regulate seizure of phones or other digital devices belonging to individuals, particularly media professionals.
The bench, however, questioned the two-year delay by the government since the filing of the petition before it and said, “When did we issue notice? Some time frame has to be followed. Two years have passed.”
The ASG assured the apex court that the guidelines would be ready by the next week. The bench asked him to get it done and posted the matter for further hearing to December 14. Senior advocate Nitya Ramakrishnan, appearing for the petitioners, told the court that there is an urgent need for guidelines and suggested that copies of necessary data on devices could be taken instead of seizing the entire content.
About 300 journalists were raided in relation to the recent Newsclick case, she said. On the last hearing, the top court remarked that there should be guidelines in place to govern the search and seizure of phones or other digital devices and media professionals could have confidential information or details about their sources on their devices.
The petition said there is increasing reliance on personal digital devices by media professionals for their journalistic work, which often involves handling “confidential information of public value, private correspondence with sources and whistle-blowers, and remote collaboration to break news stories in the public interest”.