New Delhi, February 25 The Delhi High Court on Wednesday sought the response of the Centre and Delhi Police on a petition challenging the "disproportionate" collection of personal and biometric information from individuals by the police in connection with a crime.
A bench of Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia issued notice to the Centre, Delhi Police, and the National Crime Records Bureau on the petition filed by two students against the Criminal Procedure (Identification) Act and its rules.
The petitioner's senior counsel stated that the petitioners, who are students at a university, had participated in a peaceful protest against arbitrary disciplinary proceedings against them.
While an FIR was registered against the second petitioner for offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the Delhi Prevention of Defacement of Public Property Act, and the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, no FIR was registered against the first petitioner.
However, the police "coerced" both of them to provide their biometrics, including photographs and fingerprints, the senior counsel alleged.
She contended that the law was disproportionate and did not differentiate between minor and serious offences.
In the petition, the petitioners stated that the Act and its rules granted authorities an "unlimited, discretionary power" to collect sensitive information from anyone who came into contact with the criminal justice system, and infringed the fundamental right to privacy, the right against self-incrimination, and the guarantee against arbitrary state action.
The petition further added that the law neither prescribed a procedure for the destruction and disposal of such records nor did it automatically require the deletion of the "measurements" of those acquitted, instead authorizing the authorities to store the data for 75 years.
The law also allowed the National Crime Records Bureau to "share and disseminate" such sensitive personal data with "any law enforcement agency," which facilitated profiling.
"In view of the expansive nature of the provision, any person who comes remotely into contact with the criminal justice system falls within the scope of the impugned Act. For instance, a person convicted of criminal defamation under Section 356 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, can be obligated to provide a DNA swab, under the pain of the penalties prescribed by the impugned Act.
"Similarly, a person merely arrested for speeding and careless driving would also be obligated to provide biological samples. It is respectfully submitted that the impugned Act is, therefore, a disproportionate invasion of the right to privacy," the petition said.
The matter will be heard again in March.