The Karnataka High Court recently held that an accused cannot be subjected to continuous electronic surveillance by making him share his mobile live location as a condition for the grant of bail..Justice M Nagaprasanna made the observation while dealing with a plea seeking the relaxation of conditions imposed on an accused by a sessions court while granting him anticipatory bail. Among other conditions, the sessions court had ordered the accused to keep his mobile phone location switched on in order to share it with the Investigating Officer. This condition was quashed by the High Court. “All other conditions cannot be interfered with except the last one, which directs the petitioner to keep his location on, on his mobile and share the live location with the Investigating Officer. This cannot be a condition that can be imposed for grant of bail, while other conditions are,” stated the Court in its April 22 order..The Court was dealing with a petition by a man accused of extortion, criminal intimidation and related charges. He had earlier been granted anticipatory bail by a sessions court in Udupi.He later approached the High Court seeking a modification or relaxation of the conditions imposed on him by the sessions court while granting him anticipatory bail.The High Court noted at that the plea was vague. It had not specified which particular condition required relaxation. The Court also added that it appeared as though the accused had sought a relaxation of all bail conditions.“The prayer does not indicate what conditions should be relaxed,” observed the Court. Further, the Court recorded that no advocate had appeared on behalf of the accused on the earlier date of hearing. Despite the matter being listed as a last chance, there was again no representation, noted the Court..Despite these deficiencies, the Court examined the bail conditions imposed by the sessions court. These conditions included: - Execution of a bond of ₹1 lakh with surety- Regular appearance before the trial court- Refraining from criminal activity- Not threatening or influencing witnesses- Marking monthly attendance before the police..Additionally, another condition required the accused to keep the location tracking feature on his mobile phone activated at all times so that his whereabouts could be accessed by the Investigating Officer.The High Court held that such a condition could not be imposed as a condition for bail. It observed that mandating continuous location tracking crosses the bounds of permissible restrictions.Hence, the Court quashed the mandate of keeping the mobile location switched on and sharing live location.With this modification, the Court closed the petition, leaving all other bail conditions intact..Courts cannot order accused to share Google pin location as condition for bail: Supreme Court.Advocate Dilraj Jude Rohit Sequeira appeared for the accused.Additional State Public Prosecutor BN Jagadeesha represented the State..[Read Order]
