Explained: The Supreme Court’s judgment against 24/7 surveillance as a bail condition
The Leaflet / by Gursimran Kaur Bakshi
In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court has held that a bail condition enabling police to monitor the movement of an accused out on bail through mobile phones is illegal and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution.
…
It remains to be seen whether this judgment of the Supreme Court will provide relief to the Bhima Koregaon-Elgar Parishad accused Shoma Sen, Vernon Gonsalves and Arun Ferreira, upon whom the judiciary has imposed similar bail conditions or whether this will be another case of a progressive Order in one case which is not followed by a similar Order in another case.
Read more
Also read:
▪ If those on bail are tracked 24/7, has their liberty really been (partially) restored? (The Leaflet / May 2024)
▪ Share Gps live location with nia 24×7: Supreme Court bail conditions for Shoma Sen (Bar & Bench / April 2024)
▪ Supreme Court grants bail to Vernon Gonsalves and Arun Ferreira, with tethers (The Leaflet / Jul 2023)
▪ Inconsistencies in Bail Orders Mean Individual Liberty Is the Outcome of Judicial Lottery (The Wire / Oct 2022)