Four Army officers file privacy complaint to Supreme Court over phones seized in spy probe

• Image Credit: Internet

• Jul 9, 2022 | Poonam Nath

The four officers claim that Army officials took their mobile phones and other digital personal property in March.

Digital Desk: Four Army officers of the rank of Colonel and Lieutenant Colonel have petitioned the Supreme Courtroom, alleging that navy authorities violated their constitutional right to privacy by seizing their cellphones for an espionage investigation suspending three of them on moral grounds.

According to the officers' petition, two suspended officers work at the Army Intelligence (MI) Directorate in Delhi, while the third works as a teacher at the Defence Companies Employees College in Wellington. The fourth officer has been assigned to Mumbai.

The four officers claim military authorities seized their cellphones and other private digital property in March on the Directorate General of Army Intelligence (DGMI) orders.

According to the petition, there were suspicions that a Whatsapp group called "Patiala Peg," of which these officers were members, had been infiltrated by a Pakistani intelligence agent (PIO), which led to an investigation to see if classified information had been provided.

The petition stated that three of those officers were suspended on May 8 for violating the Military's cyber security policy, even though no espionage connections of any of those officers were uncovered during the subsequent inquiry by the Military.

According to the suspension orders, which The Indian Categorical has received, the Board of Officers (BOO) found evidence that affects their behavior as officers and gentlemen after looking through their digital property, including their Cellphones.

As per the directives, the BOO found that some of the officers had joined a WhatsApp group used for "immoral, unethical (sexual misbehavior) actions."

The suspension orders also mention the officers' participation in a WhatsApp group that included foreign nationals who weren't directly known to the police.

A forensic investigation of the phone was necessary after determining that one officer had erased the chat and left the group while using Twitter in violation of current policy. The initial suspension period for all three officers is six months.

Col. Amit Kumar (retd), a petitioner's lawyer, stated in a conversation with The Indian Categorical that the key issue in the plea is the failure to follow the procedure under the CrPC for seizure and forcing the officers to self-incriminate through the "unlawful confiscation" of their phones.

Col. Amit Kumar (retd) further claimed that the three cops were purportedly suspended without giving them a show-cause notice. "It's a blatant case of privateers' rights being violated by coercive forensic analysis of their personal information, which may be connected to family and friends."

An official from the Military stated in response to a request for comment that an "investigation into an incidence of alleged cyber safety breach by some serving members of the Indian Military is under progress."

The four officers said in their appeal before the supreme court that military authorities had improperly taken their cellphones. However, they had voluntarily turned them up in good faith to aid an espionage probe "in the finest traditions" of the Military.

They claimed that despite no evidence of incrimination being found against them in connection with cyber warfare activities, they had been "illegally suspended" using "unfairly obtained" personal information from their phones.

The cops agreed that they were willing to hand over their private digital property without any conditions as long as they were guaranteed their right to privacy in response to their appeal.

They further stated in the petition that the Military Act and Military Guidelines do not contain any provisions for such seizures and that the approved search and seizure provisions under the CrPC should be used, but this was not done in their case.

The officers have claimed that the Military's actions have violated their fundamental rights and that their profession and names have been tainted by authorities' illegal actions as aspiring officers.

The four officers have asked the judge to determine whether or not the right to life and liberty guaranteed by Article 21 of the System will be taken away from Military officers without following guidelines and procedures and whether or not the right to privacy is available to them.

Also Read: Amitabh Kant, former CEO of NITI Aayog, to be India's G20 Sherpa