- People following closely would have noticed one of the Bills introduced in Parliament recently. On scrutiny, the Criminal Procedure (Identification) Bill authorizing the collection, storage, and analysis of biological samples, biometrics, and physical measurements of convicts, arrested persons, and those in preventive detention is a big letdown exacerbated by bad drafting to boot. Note that the Identification of Prisoners Act, 1920, which the Bill seeks to replace restricts itself to finger/footprints of arrested persons and their storage only for convicted persons, which needed an upgrade in line with the fast-changing crime scenario suitable to the Indian context.
PC: Rajashree Seal
- As you are aware, famed agencies like the Federal Bureau of Investigation of the US and other similar entities have moved on to advanced biometrics where such data certainly has crime-fighting uses. Unfortunately, this positive intent is defeated by the above Bill’s provisions. For instance, look at the carte balance of police officers in sample collection. While those arrested for offenses carrying less than seven years imprisonment or not facing sexual crimes against women or children can refuse to give samples, actual policing in India rarely gives much leeway to ordinary citizens to withhold their consent.
- Mind you, with computing power no longer a finite phenomenon, data collection eased by handheld devices, and all state governments competing to build multidimensional databases, there may be no holding back the thana cop. Moreover, a better legislative design would have inverted the process to mandate police officers to secure a magistrate’s order to collect samples. We know how lumping those in preventive detention, who are essentially held on the apprehension of breach of public order even before committing any act of criminality, with convicts and those arrested for major offenses, has panned out in the country.
PC: Legalcounselbd
- No wonder, the opposition parliamentarians are rightly irked, and the center must not see this as the usual pushback against anything the treasury benches propose. We are aware of the fact of India’s long history of state governments using police departments to hound opponents. As such, the Bill has simply not provided enough checks and balances to prevent abuse of its provisions by police to harass or implicate innocent persons. Further, it neither dwells on unauthorized access to stored data through hacking nor misuse of data by the police. Even dubious techniques like narco-analysis which the Supreme Court ruled inadmissible as evidence, or prone-to-abuse facial recognition can become commonplace.
- Interestingly, Bill’s definition of measurements surpasses biometrics and biological data to offer a wide berth for any other examination referred to in Sections 53 and 53A of the Criminal Procedure Code. These two CrPC sections, are, in turn, loosely worded to allow for such other tests which a registered medical practitioner thinks necessary. Nonetheless, the government should also concentrate its energies on bolstering fundamentals like more forensic facilities which the country seriously lags with only 27% of India’s cops having access to thanas. It is common knowledge how courts across India bemoan delays caused by too few forensic science labs. Thus, remedial corrections should be incorporated into the critical Bill to make it all-encompassing.
