Supreme Court issues safeguards to curb police intrusion into lawyers' digital devices

The Supreme Court on Friday ruled that the police, for the purposes of investigation under Section 94 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) may direct a lawyer to produce digital devices only before the jurisdictional court, which will decide on any objections.

The Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) BR Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran and NV Anjaria explained that this safeguard was necessary since lawyers’ digital devices may contain information relating to clients other than the one under police investigation.

The jurisdictional court will have to hear both the advocate and the concerned party before deciding on any police request for access to the device.

“On production of the digital device by the Advocate before the Court; the Court shall issue notice to the party with respect to whom the details are sought to be discovered from the digital device and hear the party and the Advocate on any objection regarding the production of the digital device, discovery from it and the admissibility of that discovered,” the Court ordered.

When examining digital devices after overruling the objections, the presence of the lawyer and the client must be ensured along with presence of an expert in digital technology, the Court further said.

“If the objections are overruled by the Court, then the digital device shall be opened only in the presence of the party and the Advocate, who will be enabled due assistance of a person with expertise in digital technology, of their choice,” it ordered.

The Court emphasised that the confidentiality of other clients must not be affected during the examination of the devices.

“While examining the digital device, care shall be taken by the Court not to impair the confidentiality with respect to the other clients of the Advocate and the discovery shall be confined to that sought by the Investigating Officer, if it is found to be permissible and admissible,” it added.

The top court passed these directions today in its judgment on a suo motu case initiated by it to consider the issue of investigating agencies summoning lawyers who provide legal advice or represent accused persons in criminal cases. The issue related to seizure of documents and digital equipments was also taken up during the hearing of the matter.

[Read Judgment]