Explained: The Supreme Court’s judgment against 24/7 surveillance as a bail condition

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)

Comments are closed.