The Bombay High Court has ordered the Maharashtra government to compensate a 26-year-old Nagpur resident after ruling that police officers violated her constitutional right to privacy by entering her bedroom and seizing her mobile phone without following legal procedures.
A Nagpur bench, consisting of Justices Urmila Joshi Phalke and Nivedita Mehta, directed the state to pay the woman Rs 10,000 within two months. The court added that the state government is authorized to recover this penalty directly from the police officer responsible for the unauthorized search.
According to the court order, which was made public on Monday after being issued last week, the right to privacy is an inseparable part of the right to life and personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The bench ruled that entering a citizen’s home, particularly a woman’s bedroom, without adhering to statutory safeguards, and forcibly taking her phone constitutes a severe violation of privacy and dignity.
Rejection Of Police Investigation Claims
The court rejected arguments from the police department that the search was justified because it was part of an ongoing investigation. The judges emphasized that investigative agencies must operate strictly within the boundaries of the law, noting that the goal of an investigation does not make an otherwise illegal search or seizure permissible.
While acknowledging that financial compensation cannot fully restore the petitioner’s compromised privacy and dignity, the bench stated that the payout provides some solace for the violation of her constitutional rights. The court noted that the ruling should serve as a reminder that investigative powers must be exercised legally and not arbitrarily.
Background Of The Search And Allegations
The legal action arose after the petitioner, a resident of Saoner in the Nagpur district, filed a plea alleging that police officers illegally entered her home and bedroom.
The police asserted that they visited the residence to question the woman regarding a car accident. However, the petitioner stated that neither she nor her husband had been named as accused individuals in the accident case.
In her petition, the woman alleged that officers repeatedly visited her residence to question her without issuing any formal legal notices, which she characterized as harassment. She also stated that the police illegally confiscated and held her mobile phone for two days without following the required legal protocols established under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
The high court concluded that the police had clearly failed to comply with statutory legal requirements, making both the search of the bedroom and the seizure of the phone illegal.
