SC to test legality of Delhi Police use of facial recognition of protesters
Supreme Court Reviews Delhi Police Facial Recognition Surveillance at Protests
Bharatmorningnews.com – The apex court has consented to review the constitutional validity of Delhi Police’s facial recognition deployment during demonstrations at Jantar Mantar. The judicial inquiry will determine whether this mass monitoring infringes upon citizens’ fundamental rights encompassing privacy, dignity, freedom of expression, and the right to peaceful gathering.
Constitutional Bench Issues Notices
A three-member bench consisting of Chief Justice Surya Kant alongside Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana has issued formal notices to both the Central government and the Delhi Police commissioner. This action follows a public interest litigation initiated by CPI(M) Rajya Sabha member AA Rahim, who contests the alleged implementation of artificial intelligence-driven surveillance mechanisms and biometric identification systems targeting demonstrators.
Senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy, representing the petitioner, clarified the scope of the challenge before the court. She emphasized that the petition focuses specifically on facial recognition applications utilized by Delhi Police against protesters, noting that collected information remains stored with commercial entities.
“This is very specific prayer concerning facial recognition being used by the Delhi Police against protesters, and the data is held with private companies,” Guruswamy stated.
According to Guruswamy, the monitoring apparatus includes both a specialized vehicle equipped with facial recognition capabilities and smart eyewear devices. She explained that information gathering occurs without obtaining consent from individuals being tracked. These commercial organizations maintain the accumulated data, potentially breaching the Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, Criminal Procedure Code provisions, and other regulatory frameworks.
“One maps your face and one is a vehicle. So spectacles are used and a vehicle is also used. And that data is all taken without permission. These private entities host the data. In violation, we will argue, of the DPDP Rules, CrPC and a variety of things,” she added.
Connection to Sansad Chalo Petitions
The bench ordered that the current petition be consolidated with existing cases related to the July 20 Sansad Chalo demonstration. Those separate filings contain accusations of police misconduct, including the deployment of pellet weapons and physical aggression directed at both demonstrators and law enforcement officers.
Filed through advocate Subhash Chandran KR, the Rahim petition asserts that since the Jantar Mantar sit-in commenced on June 20, thousands of participants, media representatives, and members of the public have experienced ongoing biometric monitoring.
Rahim requests the court to declare that the indiscriminate application of facial recognition and biometric surveillance against non-violent protesters violates constitutional provisions. Additionally, he seeks orders preventing Delhi Police from continuing such technological deployments until legislative bodies enact dedicated legislation permitting their use.
Specific Reliefs Sought
The petition outlines several remedies including comprehensive disclosure of surveillance equipment, database systems, operational protocols, and commercial agreements utilized during the Jantar Mantar demonstrations. It further demands the removal of protester biometric records from NAFIS, CCTNS, and related repositories.
Another critical relief involves establishing a procedural mechanism allowing individuals to verify whether their biometric information was captured and subsequently request its elimination. The petition additionally calls upon private service providers to permanently erase biometric data gathered during protests and provide certification confirming such destruction.
Furthermore, the petition seeks to prevent vendors from utilizing the collected information to train, develop or improve facial recognition or artificial intelligence systems.
Technological Methods and Legal Concerns
The surveillance operations reportedly employed multiple tools including stationary CCTV cameras, aerial drones, a Mobile Command and Control Vehicle, and portable handheld units. Real-time facial identification utilized the Ikshana surveillance vehicle alongside AjnaLens smart glasses. Fingerprint collection occurred through the NCRB’s Abhigyan application, with results cross-referenced against the National Automated Fingerprint Identification System.
The legal challenge argues that no existing statute empowers biometric monitoring of individuals engaged in lawful demonstrations. Neither the Delhi Police standing orders regulating protests nor the Criminal Procedure (Identification) Act of 2022 authorize such surveillance of peaceful participants.
Based on Right to Information responses secured from Delhi Police, the petition claims that no privacy impact assessment preceded the surveillance implementation. It further alleges that an 80 percent similarity threshold determines a positive facial recognition match, despite lacking publicly documented validation of this standard.
The petitioner also notes that Delhi Police publicly states its facial recognition technology serves primarily to locate missing persons and identify deceased individuals, rather than to manage peaceful assemblies.
The petition invokes the Supreme Court’s precedent on privacy rights to strengthen its constitutional arguments regarding the legality of mass biometric surveillance during public demonstrations.
Related Reading
Frequently Asked Questions
What is SC to test legality of Delhi?
SC to test legality of Delhi is the main topic of this guide. The article explains the context, practical details, and next steps readers should understand.
Why does SC to test legality of Delhi matter?
SC to test legality of Delhi matters because readers are looking for a useful answer, not just a short summary. Good content should match search intent and help them decide what to do next.