In a crucial ruling, the Andhra Pradesh High Court has stated that the failure of accused persons to submit their mobile phones during police custody cannot be termed as “non-cooperation,” given the constitutional protection under Article 20(3). The judgment was made while addressing bail pleas of N
In a significant ruling, the Andhra Pradesh High Court clarified that the failure of accused individuals to hand over their mobile phones while in custody cannot be deemed as “non-cooperation.” The judgment was made while addressing bail pleas in a high-profile political case involving former Member of Parliament N. Suresh Babu and businessman Avutu Srinivasa Reddy, both affiliated with the YSR Congress Party (YSRCP). This ruling reinforces the protection afforded to accused persons under Article 20(3) of the Indian Constitution, which prohibits self-incrimination.
Case Background
- During the investigation, the police demanded that the accused submit their mobile phones for further evidence collection, a request which was not complied with by Babu and Reddy.
- The State argued that the mobile phones were critical for the investigation and cited the non-submission as a ground to oppose bail.
- The petitioners, along with 70 others allegedly associated with the YSRCP, were accused of forcibly entering the Telugu Desam Party (TDP) State Office and attacking its supporters and employees.
Court’s Observations
- The bench, led by Justice Dr. V.R.K. Krupa Sagar, noted that forcing the accused to submit their mobile phones would violate Article 20(3) of the Constitution, which protects individuals from being compelled to testify against themselves.
- The court referenced a similar precedent from Delhi High Court in the case of Sanket Bhadresh Modi v. Central Bureau of Investigation (2024 LiveLaw (Del) 5). In that case, the court had ruled that the accused cannot be compelled to disclose passwords or other confidential details of seized electronic devices during an ongoing investigation.
- The court stated: “In the light of the above principles, the failure of the accused in submitting their mobile phones while in custody cannot be termed as non-cooperation. The investigation agency may not feel deterred in securing further electronic evidence simply because it could not take hold of the mobile phones from the accused.”
Decision on Bail
- The court noted that material evidence had already been collected by the police, and about 34 other accused persons had been granted bail.
- It was observed that the accused had stable residences and were unlikely to evade the legal process.
- Considering the evidence and circumstances, the court deemed further detention unnecessary and granted bail to N. Suresh Babu and Avutu Srinivasa Reddy.
Click to read: Avuthu Srinivas Reddy Versus The Station House Officer (CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.6295 and 6306 of 2024)
