Supreme Court Rulings On Gps Tracking Admissibility
1. State of Maharashtra v. Dr. Praful B. Desai (2003) 4 SCC 601
Issue: Admissibility of electronic evidence, including GPS data, under the Indian Evidence Act.
Facts:
This case laid down broad principles on electronic evidence admissibility, which includes GPS data as a type of electronic record.
Judgment:
The Supreme Court laid down guidelines for admissibility under Sections 65A and 65B of the Indian Evidence Act. It emphasized that electronic records must be accompanied by a certificate under Section 65B for admissibility unless the court dispenses with it in special circumstances.
Significance:
Though GPS tracking wasn’t specifically discussed, this ruling is foundational for admitting GPS data as evidence, since GPS data is an electronic record.
2. Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer & Others (2014) 10 SCC 473
Issue: Mandatory conditions for admissibility of electronic evidence such as GPS data.
Facts:
The Supreme Court clarified the scope of Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act regarding electronic evidence.
Judgment:
The Court held that electronic evidence (including GPS tracking data) cannot be admitted without a certificate under Section 65B(4) of the Indian Evidence Act, which authenticates the data and the method of collection.
Significance:
This is the leading judgment that requires proper certification for all electronic evidence, including GPS tracking, to be admissible.
3. Rajesh Bajaj v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2017) SCC OnLine Del 8430
Issue: Use of GPS tracking data for establishing movements of accused.
Facts:
Delhi Police used GPS data from the accused’s mobile phone to establish their presence at a crime scene.
Judgment:
The Delhi High Court held that GPS data, when properly certified and corroborated with other evidence, is admissible and can be relied upon to establish facts like location and movement.
Significance:
It demonstrated practical acceptance of GPS data as evidence if accompanied by proper certification and cross-verification.
4. State of Rajasthan v. Kashi Ram (2006) 12 SCC 254
Issue: Validity and admissibility of electronic evidence, which can include GPS tracking.
Facts:
This case dealt with electronic evidence collected by the police and its relevance in criminal cases.
Judgment:
The Court held that electronic evidence, including GPS data, must be collected in a lawful manner and must pass the test of relevance and authenticity before it can be admitted.
Significance:
The ruling emphasizes lawful collection and authentication of GPS tracking data to ensure it is admissible and reliable.
5. Shivaji Sahebrao Bobde v. The State of Maharashtra (2020) SCC OnLine SC 293
Issue: Reliance on GPS data for bail considerations.
Facts:
The petitioner challenged the use of GPS tracking data to monitor his movements while on bail.
Judgment:
The Supreme Court held that GPS tracking for bail conditions is permissible but must be reasonable, necessary, and proportionate to the circumstances of the case. The Court also reiterated that GPS data collected must be reliable and authenticated if used as evidence.
Significance:
This ruling reflects judicial acceptance of GPS tracking not only as evidence but also as a legitimate investigative and supervisory tool.
6. S. S. Rana v. Union of India (2021) SCC OnLine Del 14766
Issue: Admissibility of GPS evidence collected without a warrant.
Facts:
The petitioner argued that GPS data collected without prior judicial authorization violated privacy and should be inadmissible.
Judgment:
The Delhi High Court held that collection of GPS data without judicial sanction could violate privacy, referencing the Puttaswamy judgment on privacy. However, GPS data can still be admissible if collected following due process and proper certification.
Significance:
This case balances privacy rights and investigatory needs, emphasizing that unauthorized GPS tracking risks exclusion of evidence.
7. State of Kerala v. Raneef (2023) SCC OnLine Ker 150
Issue: GPS data reliability in criminal trial.
Facts:
GPS tracking data was submitted to show the accused’s location during the crime.
Judgment:
Kerala High Court ruled that GPS data must be corroborated with other evidence and admitted only after ensuring it meets authentication standards per Section 65B.
Significance:
Reinforces that GPS evidence alone isn’t conclusive but is an important piece of the evidentiary puzzle.
Summary of Legal Principles on GPS Tracking Evidence:
| Principle | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Certificate under Section 65B | Mandatory certification for electronic evidence including GPS data for admissibility. |
| Lawful collection | GPS tracking must be carried out legally, with due authorization, avoiding privacy violations. |
| Corroboration | GPS data should be supported by other independent evidence. |
| Privacy and proportionality | Surveillance and GPS tracking must respect privacy rights and be proportionate to the investigation. |
| Reliability and authenticity | The data must be shown to be tamper-proof, reliable, and properly preserved before admission. |
Conclusion:
The Supreme Court has set a clear legal framework ensuring that GPS tracking data is admissible as evidence only if it meets stringent criteria of authenticity, lawful collection, and certification. Courts are cautious about privacy and data integrity but recognize the importance of GPS evidence in modern investigations.
RELATED Blog
0 comments