On Monday, the Supreme Court announced its intent to review the appropriateness of a bail condition imposed by the Delhi High Court in a high-profile money laundering case. The case involves the internal auditor of Shakti Bhog Foods Limited (SBFL), accused of being involved in a significant bank loan fraud amounting to several crores.

The contentious bail condition under question, referred to as "clause (d)," required the accused to share his Google pin location from his mobile phone with the Investigation Officer (IO) concerned throughout the entire duration of his bail. The Enforcement Directorate had challenged the Delhi High Court's decision to grant bail with this specific condition.

During the hearing, Justice Abhay S Oka expressed concerns about the intrusive nature of the bail condition, stating that it could be deemed as surveillance and, thereby, potentially infringing upon the individual's fundamental right to privacy protected under Article 21 of the Constitution.

The Additional Solicitor General SV Raju argued against the grant of bail, claiming that the accused should not have been released under any conditions. In response, the counsel for the accused asserted that the investigation was still ongoing, and the trial was not expected to begin anytime soon.

The Supreme Court, while issuing a notice to all parties involved, scheduled the matter to be further heard on 3rd October. In addition to evaluating the merits of the case, the court emphasized the need to carefully consider whether clause (d), the controversial Google pin sharing condition, could legitimately be made a part of bail conditions.

The case stems from financial irregularities and embezzlement of funds related to credit facilities obtained by SBFL from a consortium of banks, led by the State Bank of India (SBI). The estimated loss due to these activities amounted to a staggering Rs. 3269.42 crores.

The respondent maintained that he was not initially named as an accused in the First Information Report (FIR) and argued that during the period under investigation, he was not even serving as the internal auditor of SBFL.

The Delhi High Court had granted bail to the accused while permitting the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to proceed with the investigation. Alongside the contested clause (d) involving Google pin location sharing, the bail conditions also required the accused to furnish a personal bond, surrender his passport, provide an active cellphone number for contact, refrain from engaging in unlawful activities that could prejudice pending cases, and comply with the IO's directives for investigation and court appearances.

The case title is "Directorate of Enforcement V Raman Bhuraria," with Diary No. 23447 - 2023.