Centre Introduces Bill In Parliament To Collect Biometrics Of Prisoners; Opposition Raises Privacy Concerns

The Central government on Monday introduced the Criminal Procedure (Identification) Bill, 2022 in the Lok Sabha.

The Bill introduced by Union Minister Ajay Misra on behalf of Home Minister Amit Shah proposes to repeal the 102 years old 'Identification of Prisoners Act, 1920' and bring in a new law, enabling Police officials to take "measurements" of convicts for identification and investigation purposes.

Under the present regime, the Police are permitted to take finger and footprint impressions of a limited category of convicts and non-convicted persons.

The Bill proposes to allow Police collect finger impressions, palm prints impressions, footprint impressions, photographs, iris and retina scans, physical and biological samples. It also proposes collection of behavioural attributes including signatures, handwriting or any other examination referred under Section 53 or Section 53A of CrPC.

The record of measurements shall be retained for a period of 75 years from the date of collection.

"The world has undergone technological and scientific changes. Propensity to commit offence has increased. That is why we have brought this Bill. It will not only help our investigation agencies but also increase prosecution."

It further provides that any resistance to taking of measurements will be an offence under Section 186 (obstructing public servant) of IPC, attracting a jail term of three months or fine up to Rs 500 or both.

The government clarified that such persons, who are not convicted or arrested for crime against women or children or those who are in custody for an offence punishable with imprisonment for a period less than seven years, can deny permission to give their biological samples.

The Bill was strongly criticized by the Opposition for being violative of the basic human rights and the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Indian Constitution.

Violates Fundamental Rights

Congress MP Manish Tewari said that the Bill is "illegal" inasmuch as it violates Article 20(3) of the Constitution which secures the right of an accused against Self-incrimination. He further stated that the Bill militates the right to life and privacy enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution and thus, the Bill is beyond the legislative competence of the Parliament.

Furthermore, he stated that clause 4(2) of the Bill permits that record of measurement may be retained for 75 years. This, he said, violates the Right to be Forgotten, recognized by the Supreme Court in the case of Justice KS Puttaswamy v. Union of India.

He emphasized that the words "biological sample and their analysis" in clause 2(1)(b) under the Act could extend to Narco-analysis and brain-mapping and when it is made coercive in terms of clause 5, it becomes violative of the above-mentioned Fundamental Rights.

Tewari added that the implied use of force to take measurements violates the rights of prisoners, laid down by the Supreme Court in catena of judgments including AK Gopalan v. State of Madras, Kharak Singh v. State of UP, Charles Sobraj v. Jail Superintendent, Sheela Barse v. State of Maharashtra and Pramod Kumar Saxena v. Union of India.

RSP MP from Kerala NK Premchandran added that the Bill is against the principles and spirit of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).

Prof Sougata Ray, AITC, opposed the Bill saying that it is opposed to the cardinal principle of criminal jurisprudence that nobody is found guilty until proved in court of law.

Congress MP Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury highlighted that the Bill not only propses to collect biometrics of convicts but also those persons who are under trial, or are suspected to be involved in any criminal case or there is a presumption against the persons that they may in future do any illegal act. This, he said is violative of right to privacy, freedom and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.

He stated that given the rate of custodial violence in Indian prisons, there is a high risk of "forceful measurement", resulting in life long stigmatization and grave violation of human rights. "In the absence of a Data Protection statute, this bill might do more harm than good," he added.

As per Chowdhury, there is little empirical data supporting the accuracy of criminal profiling coupled with lack of adequate technology and the grave margin of error. 

He also expressed apprehensions about misuse of the Bill, especially in light of the exemption from prosecution for acts done under the Act, intended in good faith.

The Government on the other hand defended the Bill, saying that it is aimed at increasing prosecution and eliminating wrong identification of accused. The Union Minister added that the Bill has been brought after holding extensive consultations with the Law Ministry, National Crime Records Bureau, state agencies and other stakeholders.

The Bill was finally introduced after a division of votes, recording 120 ayes and 58 noes.

Click Here To Read/Download The Bill