Seized electronic devices may be returned after secure data cloning, with integrity safeguards and disclosure of relied-upon material.

Where seized mobile phones and other electronic devices have been used to store evidentiary data, the data may be cloned onto a CD or pen drive with hash-value integrity safeguards, after which continued retention of the physical devices is unnecessary. The Court directed that the petitioners be allowed to remain present during copying, that verified copied data be preserved for use in adjudication and prosecution, and that documents downloaded from the devices and relied upon in show cause notices or complaints be supplied as relied upon material. It also indicated that the order should be circulated for consideration of a standard operating procedure for retrieval and preservation of data from seized devices.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the seized mobile phones and other electronic devices were liable to be returned to the petitioners after copying and preservation of the data contained in them; (ii) Whether suitable safeguards were required for copying, verification, preservation and subsequent use of the electronic data in adjudication and prosecution proceedings.

Issue (i): Whether the seized mobile phones and other electronic devices were liable to be returned to the petitioners after copying and preservation of the data contained in them.

Analysis: The petitions were founded on the grievance that the investigation had concluded and show cause notices had already been issued, while the devices had been retained only because they contained electronic data. The Court noted that the data could be properly copied onto a CD or pen drive, with a hash value to preserve integrity, and that the copied data could be used in the pending proceedings in accordance with law. Once the data was secured and verified, continued retention of the physical devices was not necessary.

Conclusion: The devices were directed to be returned to the petitioners after copying and verification of the data.

Issue (ii): Whether suitable safeguards were required for copying, verification, preservation and subsequent use of the electronic data in adjudication and prosecution proceedings.

Analysis: The Court required the petitioners to be given an opportunity to remain present when the data was copied, so that no objection could later be raised to the manner of extraction or proof. It further directed that any document downloaded from the devices and relied upon in the show cause notice or prosecution complaint be listed and supplied as relied upon material. The Court also indicated that the order should be circulated to the CBIC for considering a standard operating procedure for retrieval and preservation of data from seized devices.

Conclusion: Appropriate procedural safeguards for copying, verification, preservation, and disclosure of relied upon material were directed.

Final Conclusion: The petitions succeeded to the extent that the respondents were required to preserve the electronic data, supply relied upon material, and return the physical devices after the data was secured, and the matters stood finally disposed of.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the electronic contents of seized devices can be securely cloned and preserved with integrity safeguards, continued retention of the physical devices is unnecessary, and the devices should ordinarily be returned after the data is duly copied and verified.

---