In our increasingly digital world, personal and professional information is predominantly stored on electronic devices, effectively making them vast repositories of our lives. This reliance on digital storage raises significant concerns when law enforcement agencies demand and seize these entire “digital vaults,” often without clear relevance to their investigations. The Legal Quandary of Digital Searches Investigative bodies like the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), the Enforcement Directorate (ED), and the Income Tax Department possess powers to conduct searches and seizures when they suspect concealment or tampering of records, including digital ones. While these powers are vital for uncovering crucial evidence, the current legal framework falls short concerning digital data. There’s a notable absence of explicit provisions and guidelines for searching digital records, particularly regarding comprehensive cloning of devices, handling encrypted information, and accessing cross-border data. Unlike physical records, the sheer volume and sensitive nature of personal data within digital devices necessitate a more nuanced and protective approach, even during investigations. Despite these complexities, law enforcement often demands and seizes an entire ecosystem of data, far exceeding what is directly pertinent to an inquiry. Companies frequently comply with these requests, fearing repercussions under criminal law for non-cooperation. The Overriding Concern: Privacy The primary casualty in these extensive digital seizures is the fundamental right to privacy. Individuals and businesses are justifiably concerned about the safeguarding and segregation of their personal data from investigative materials. Unrestricted access to an individual’s complete digital footprint, which often includes highly personal information, poses a significant threat to this fundamental right. Recent Developments and Judicial Intervention A notable instance occurred in December 2024 when the Supreme Court restricted the ED from copying and accessing information from the electronic devices of Santiago Martin, the “Lottery King,” and his relatives. The petitioners argued that such access infringed on their right to privacy due to the deeply personal and sensitive nature of the data on their devices. Further highlighting this critical gap in the legal framework, a petition filed by the Foundation for Media Professionals (FMP) in October 2022 underscored that digital devices contain a wealth of personal information, from private communications to health and financial data. The absence of clear legal safeguards for searching and seizing these devices represents a substantial intrusion into individual autonomy and privacy. Recognizing the gravity of this issue, the Supreme Court, in November 2023, instructed the Union government to consider formulating guidelines for digital device searches. The Supreme Court’s landmark Puttaswamy judgment unequivocally established privacy, including informational privacy, as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution. The principles of data protection enshrined in the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (DPDPA), while not directly governing law enforcement search procedures, reinforce the need for robust safeguards when personal data is accessed during investigations. In 2022, the investigative arm of the Competition Commission of India (CCI) raided Appario Retail’s premises, cloning phones of three Samsung employees and allegedly seizing confidential business information. More recently, in 2025, similar raids in the advertising industry led to the cloning of mobile phones and laptops, raising concerns about the scale of data accessed from employee devices, including potentially personal and unrelated information. These events demonstrate that current search and seizure operations are not consistently guided by explicit legal provisions, creating potential for abuse and undermining due process. Standardized operating procedures for digital searches are therefore crucial to prevent such occurrences. The Path Forward: Balancing Rights and Investigations It’s imperative that the legal framework governing the search and seizure of electronic records instills confidence in individuals and companies. Digital devices should be seen as sophisticated data vaults, not inescapable data coffins that expose every aspect of our lives. The ongoing FMP v. Union of India case represents a pivotal moment for India’s legal and constitutional landscape. As India navigates the complexities of the digital age, the Supreme Court has a unique opportunity to establish clear guidelines that strike a balance between individual privacy rights and the legitimate needs of law enforcement. This case underscores the vital importance of transparency, accountability, and proportionality in digital searches, with the anticipation that the judgment will lead to definitive guidelines for the search and seizure of digital devices.
