Criminal Procedure (Identification) Act, 2022

Content

Background

• The Identification of Prisoners Act, 1920 allows police officers to collect certain identifiable information (fingerprints and footprints) of persons including convicts and arrested persons.
  • Also, a Magistrate may order measurements or photographs of a person to be taken to aid the investigation of an offence.
  •  In case of acquittal or discharge of the person, all material must be destroyed.
• There have been advances in technology that allow other measurements to be used for criminal investigations.  
  • The DNA Technology (Use and Application) Regulation Bill, 2019 (pending in Lok Sabha) provides a framework for using DNA technology for this purpose.
•  In 1980, the Law Commission of India, while examining the 1920 Act, had noted the need to revise it to bring it in line with modern trends in criminal investigation.
•  In March 2003, the Expert Committee on Reforms of the Criminal Justice System (Chair: Dr. Justice V. S. Malimath) recommended amending the 1920 Act to empower the Magistrate to authorise the collection of data such as blood samples for DNA, hair, saliva, and semen.

Key Features of the Bill

• The Bill expands: the type of data that may be collected, 
  • Persons from whom such data may be collected
  • The authority that may authorise such a collection. 
•  It also provides for the data to be stored in a central database.  Under both the 1920 Act and the 2022 Bill, resistance or refusal to give data will be considered an offence of obstructing a public servant from doing his duty.
• The National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) will be the central agency to maintain the records.  It will share the data with law enforcement agencies.  
  • Further, states/UTs may notify agencies to collect, preserve, and share data in their respective jurisdictions.
• The data collected will be retained in digital or electronic form for 75 years.  Records will be destroyed in case of persons who are acquitted after all appeals, or released without trial.  
  • However, in such cases, a Court or Magistrate may direct the retention of details after recording reasons in writing.

Comparison of key provisions of the 1920 Act and the 2022 Bill

Significance of the Bill

• It will make the investigation of crime more efficient and expeditious and will also help in increasing the conviction rate.
• Provisions for the use of modern techniques to capture and record appropriate body measurements.
• The Bill states that it is necessary to expand the “ambit of persons” whose measurements can be taken as this will help investigating agencies gather sufficient legally admissible evidence and establish the crime of the accused person.
• Check serious national and global threats posed by them.

Issues with the bill

• The data can be collected not just from convicted persons but also from persons arrested for any offence and from any other person to aid an investigation.
• The data collected does not need to have any relationship with evidence required for the case.
• The data is stored in a central database which can be accessed widely and not just in the case file
• The data is stored for 75 years (effectively, for life).
  • The data would be deleted only on the final acquittal or discharge of a person arrested for an offence.  The retention of data in a central database and its potential use for the investigation of offences in the future may also not meet the necessity and proportionality standards.
• Safeguards have been diluted by lowering the level of the official authorised to collect the data.
  • It lowers the level of the police officer who may take the measurement (from sub-inspector to head constable) and also allows the head warder of a prison to take measurements. 
• The Bill widens the ambit of data to be collected to include biometrics (finger prints, palm prints, foot prints, iris and retina scan), physical and biological samples (not defined but could include blood, semen, saliva, etc.), and behavioural attributes (signature, handwriting, and could include voice samples).   
  • It does not limit the measurements to those required for a specific investigation
• It violates Article 20 (3) of the Constitution that safeguards the rights of citizens by providing that “no person accused of an offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself”.

Way Forward

• The need is to have more experts to collect measurements from the scene of crime, more forensic labs, and equipment to analyse them to identify possible accused involved in a criminal case.
• The need of the hour is a strong data protection law,with stringent punishment for breaches, should be in place.
• The sensitive personal information collected, stored, preserved and shared under the Bill must be relevant and limited to the purpose for which such information is collected and stored.