.png)
UNDERSTANDING CRIMINAL PROCEDURE (IDENTIFICATION) BILL
- Unique Law
- Apr 17, 2022
- 3 min read
Updated: Apr 18, 2022
This April we saw enactment of a new law, The Criminal Procedure (Identification) Bill, 2022. Before we dive deep into the bill and its interpretations, let us attempt to understand the intention of law makers behind tabling this bill. Basic intention was to bring in speedy investigations and replacing the age old The Identification of Prisoners Act, 1920. Advancement in the technologies, forensic procedures, process of collection of information prompted our legislators to call for this change. Is this a welcoming change that fits in well with the current times where privacy laws are given the pedestal?
Understanding the law
What data can be collected – The Bill expands its wings and authorises collection of personal information to sensitive information which includes biological samples, signatures, handwriting samples, semen, iris, hair samples and allows DNA profiling. (1920 Act permitted fingerprints, footprints, photographs). The Bill further allows the police officials to collect behavioural attributes including handwriting samples, signatures or conduct any other examination as per section 53 of Cr.P.C (explains that it is reasonably necessary to collect such evidence for the investigation)
Whose data may be collected – Another important angle to be considered here about the bill is whose data can be collected? Data of convicted persons, persons arrested for any offence, from any other person who might aid an investigation (on the order of magistrate), persons detained under preventive detention laws. However, samples can be forcibly taken from persons arrested for offences against women or a child or is arrested for an offence which is punishable for minimum of 7 years imprisonment. (1920 Act does not allow collection of information from arrested persons)
Who can collect – After understanding what can be collected and from whom it can be collected, it is imperative to learn who can collect it? The new law says, officer in charge of a police station, or a head constable, head warder of a prison, judicial magistrate of first class, metropolitan magistrate, executive magistrate (in case of persons required to maintain good behaviour) can collect the data. (1920 Act allowed officer in charge of police station, investigating officer, or SI or above)
Where is the data stored – The National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) is the agency which will maintain the information centrally and other law enforcement agencies can access, collect, and share the data from here.
What are the concerns – There are multiple factors that are concerning in this law. This law at the outset, is more intrusive than the colonial law. It is invading the privacy zone of the individuals. Right to privacy is a fundamental right is a known fact in the country after Supreme Courts’ decision in Puttuswamy’s case. Current law contradicts the rules laid down with respect to Right to Privacy as the data can be collected from persons who are arrested and from persons who aids in investigation and the data collected need not have a nexus with the investigation and need not be a part of important evidence for the case. Further, the data collected can be stored for a period of 75 years. In most of the cases, this may turn out to be for lifetime. Persons arrested need not always be convicted. Irrespective of the fact of their conviction, their data can be stored for 75 years. Further, by lowering the cadre of the officer that can collect the information, security and safety of the information is being compromised. Not every officer in the police station is capable and trained to handle the process with utmost care and security. There is every possibility of leakage/misuse of confidential/sensitive information.
It does not end there. Further, there is an inequality angle to this. An arrested person may refuse to give his biological samples unless he is arrested for an offence against a woman or a child or an offence that is punishable for 7 years or more. Nowhere in the bill it explained about what offences against a women or child it is referring to. Now, does this mean that an offence of cheating or theft against women falls under this umbrella?
With the non-existence of data protection laws in the country, entry of this Act is generating more fear than confidence in the law enforcement agencies. Safety measures taken for collecting, using, sharing, and storing the data left unexplained adds to the complexity.
~Authored by Pallavi Rupanagudi
References:
Comments