Recently, the Criminal Procedure (Identification) Bill, 2022, was introduced in the Lok Sabha. This bill has some significant provisions and implications that have been highly debated, particularly with regards to the protection of fundamental rights of citizens, including the right to privacy. The bill allows the collection, storage, and analysis of samples from individuals by police and prison authorities, causing concern among various stakeholders. Here’s a deeper look into this controversial bill and its implications.
Provisions of the Bill
The Criminal Procedure (Identification) Bill, 2022, includes permissions for authorities to collect retina and iris scans. Resistance or refusal to comply with sample collection is considered an offense under Section 186 of the Indian Penal Code. The bill extends to people held under any preventive detention law. Furthermore, it authorizes the taking of measurements of convicts and “other persons” for identification in criminal matters; however, “other persons” is not defined, implying potential implications beyond convicts, detainees, and arrested individuals.
Police personnel up to the rank of Head Constable are sanctioned to record these measurements. The National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) will store the collected data for at least 75 years and can share the records with other law enforcement agencies.
Significance of the Bill
The bill leverages modern techniques to capture essential body measurements, which is a step forward from the outdated Identification of Prisoners Act from 1920, which allowed the collection of only fingerprints and footprints. The legislation expands the scope of individuals from whom measurements can be obtained, aiming to gather legally admissible evidence and boost crime investigation efficiency. It could potentially increase conviction rates due to more concrete evidence.
Issues with the Bill
Despite its potential advantages, the bill faces criticism for possibly infringing on citizens’ fundamental rights, including the right to privacy. Critics argue that it could force people engaged in political protests to provide samples. The legislation could also lead to narco analysis and brain mapping through forced collection of biological information, violating Article 20 (3) of the Indian Constitution, which states, “No person accused of an offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself”. The bill has been censured for potentially violating human rights provisions outlined in the United Nations charter.
Related Government Initiatives
In addition to the proposed bill, the government is taking steps such as the Crime and Criminal Tracking Network & Systems project to create an integrated system for effective e-governance and policing. The Home Ministry is working on integrating the Central Finger Print Bureau (CFPB)’s fingerprint database with the NIST Fingerprint Image Software (NFIS), used by the FBI to match fingerprints. Currently, while the FBI has over 4 crore fingerprints in its database, the CFPB’s database only houses just over 10 lakh fingerprints; hence, expanding data collection is a focus.
Previous Year Questions related to ‘Right to Privacy’
In the UPSC Civil Services Examination, a previous year question asked which article of the Constitution of India protects the ‘Right to Privacy’. The answer, under Article 21, was highlighted in the Puttaswamy v. Union of India case, 2017, where the Supreme Court declared the Right to Privacy a fundamental right. It is intrinsic to the Right to Life and Personal Liberty and is part of the freedoms guaranteed by Part III of the Indian Constitution.