monitoring-anklets-a-contentious-issue-in-j-k

In a recently rolled-out move for surveillance of criminals released on bail, Jammu and Kashmir became the first UT in the country to adopt technologically assisted monitoring, officials have said.

"In a first-of-its-kind action, Police used GPS tracker anklets on criminals bailed out in Kupwara district," an official said.

 

Two individuals, Abid Ali Bhat and Abdul Majeed Bhat, jailed under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, were the first to be fitted with these monitoring anklets upon their release, the spokesperson added.

 

Following the Kupwara implementation, a terror associate in Baramulla who was released on bail was also fitted with a GPS-enabled anklet on Thursday. This is only the second instance of such a measure being employed against a criminal released on bail.

 

The move has sparked concerns among activists and law experts, who argue that it violates the right to privacy guaranteed under the Indian Constitution.

 

They believe that being arrested under any law does not equate to conviction, and according to the Indian Constitution, every individual is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

 

Experts have highlighted the lack of specific legal provisions authorising the use of GPS tracker anklets and pointed out that the security establishment has yet to develop standards and ethics for electronic monitoring.

 

Rights activists argue that tracking individuals infringes on their fundamental right to privacy, citing the Supreme Court's ruling in the ‘Maneka Gandhi vs Union of India’ (1978) case, which established that the right to life includes the right to human dignity.

 

Given the surveillance concerns of over-regulation and human rights infringement, experts stress the need for informed consent systems and procedures to address unethical and illegal practices.

 

Recently, the Delhi High Court passed a judgment advocating the use of the Global Positioning System (GPS) and other tracking devices to monitor undertrials released on bail.

This judgment has also been criticised for potentially violating principles of liberty, privacy, and a dignified life as guaranteed by the Constitution of India.

 

The Supreme Court of India has said in its judgement that the right to privacy is a fundamental right subject to reasonable restrictions, aligning with the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

 

The Court integrated the right to privacy within the framework of the right to liberty under Articles 19 and 21 of the Indian Constitution, suggesting its essential role in an individual's life and liberty.