The recent ruling by the Supreme Court addressed a pivotal issue concerning the extent of Apple India's responsibility in tracing stolen iPhones. 

The bench, consisting of Justices Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma, overturned an observation made by the Odisha State Consumer Commission, stating that Apple has no duty to trace stolen iPhones using Unique Identity Numbers.

The case originated when a consumer, who had purchased an iPhone with theft insurance, reported the theft of his phone to the police and Apple India. Despite this, Apple India did not take any action to track the stolen device. The consumer filed a complaint, leading to a District Consumer Forum ruling in their favor. Apple India then appealed this decision to the Odisha State Consumer Commission.

The Odisha State Consumer Commission ruled that Apple India, as the manufacturer of the iPhone, was obligated to trace the stolen device using its unique identity number. However, Apple India argued against being forced to act as a law enforcement agency.

Unsatisfied with the commission's decision, Apple India escalated the case to the highest judicial authority in the country, the Supreme Court.

Upon hearing the arguments presented by both parties, the Supreme Court deliberated on the matter and ultimately overturned the directive issued by the Odisha State Consumer Commission. The court deemed the commission's observation as unwarranted, emphasizing that requiring Apple India to trace stolen phones was not within its mandated responsibilities.

Furthermore, while acknowledging Apple India's compensation to the aggrieved consumer, the Supreme Court clarified the obligations of corporations in such cases. In its ruling, the court ordered the removal of the contentious paragraph from the State Commission's order, setting a precedent for similar cases involving corporations and consumer rights in India.

Case: Apple India Private Limited v. Harish Chandra Mohanty and anr.