Author: Yash Suresh Khiste, Manikchand Pahade Law College, Chhatrapati Sambhaji Nagar, Maharashtra
ABSTRACT
Predictive policing is an emerging law enforcement strategy that uses big data, artificial intelligence (AI), and machine learning algorithms to anticipate criminal activity before it occurs. While proponents argue that predictive policing enhances crime prevention, critics contend that it leads to racial and socioeconomic biases, mass surveillance, and erosion of constitutional rights. This article examines the legality of predictive policing in India, its implications under constitutional law, and relevant judicial precedents.
TO THE POINT
What is Predictive Policing?
Predictive policing refers to algorithm-driven policing methods that analyses crime data to forecast potential criminal activity. It primarily operates through:
Place-Based Policing – Identifying high-risk locations where crime is likely to occur.
Person-Based Policing – Flagging individuals as potential suspects based on previous interactions with law enforcement.
Social Network Analysis – Mapping criminal networks to anticipate illicit activities.
Although these strategies claim to improve policing efficiency, they raise serious legal and ethical concerns regarding privacy, due process, and discrimination.
USE OF LEGAL JARGON
Key Legal Issues
Violation of Article 21: Right to Privacy.
The Supreme Court in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) recognized the Right to Privacy as an extension of Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty). Predictive policing relies on mass surveillance, tracking individuals without their consent, and storing sensitive biometric and behavioral data. Such practices contradict the proportionality test laid down in the Puttaswamy case, which mandates that any state action affecting privacy must be necessary and proportionate.
Violation of Article 14: Right to Equality
Predictive policing is based on historical crime data, which can reflect systemic biases. If algorithms disproportionately target marginalized communities, it could violate Article 14 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law. Studies in the United States have shown that AI-driven policing disproportionately affects Black and Latino communities (Ferguson, 2017). A similar concern exists in India, particularly for Dalit and Muslim communities.
Arbitrary Detentions and Article 22
Under Article 22, an individual has the right to protection against arbitrary arrest and detention. Predictive policing can lead to: Preemptive arrests based on AI predictions rather than tangible evidence.False accusations due to flawed data inputs or biases in machine learning models. Excessive surveillance, violating the principles of natural justice.
THE PROOF
Is Predictive Policing Effective or Unjust?
Critics argue that predictive policing is based on flawed data, making it unreliable. A study by The Royal Statistical Society (2019) found that predictive policing software in the U.K. was no more accurate than random human guesses in predicting crime. Moreover, the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) discontinued its predictive policing program in 2020 after reports of biased targeting of Black and Latino neighbourhood’s. In India, predictive policing tools like CMAPS (Crime Mapping Analytics and Predictive System) have been implemented in certain states, but no independent review has confirmed their accuracy or fairness.
CASE LAWS
Judicial Precedents on Surveillance and Privacy
Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017)
The Supreme Court ruled that the Right to Privacy is a fundamental right.The judgment emphasized that state surveillance must be proportionate and necessary, Predictive policing, if used without legal safeguards, can violate this precedent.
People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) v. Union of India (1997)
The Supreme Court ruled that telephone tapping violates the right to privacy unless it follows strict procedural safeguards. This case highlights that mass data collection under predictive policing must be regulated to prevent misuse.
Illinois v. Wardlow (2000) [U.S. Case Law]
The U.S. Supreme Court held that mere presence in a high-crime area is not sufficient grounds for police action. Predictive policing often relies on location-based data, which can lead to wrongful profiling and arbitrary detentions.
CONCLUSION
The Need for Legal Oversight
Predictive policing, if left unchecked, poses a serious threat to civil liberties. While it has the potential to improve law enforcement efficiency, it must be subject to strict judicial scrutiny and legal regulations to prevent:Privacy violations through mass data collection. Discrimination against marginalized communities. Arbitrary arrests without due process. To address these issues, India must:
Enact a data protection law to regulate AI-based surveillance.
Ensure judicial oversight over predictive policing programs.
Make predictive policing algorithms transparent and free from bias.
FAQS
Is predictive policing legal in India?
There is no specific law governing predictive policing in India. However, if it leads to privacy violations, discrimination, or arbitrary detentions, it may be challenged under Articles 14, 19, 21, and 22 of the Constitution.
How does predictive policing affect fundamental rights?
Predictive policing can violate privacy rights, lead to biased targeting of communities, and result in arbitrary detentions, conflicting with fundamental rights under the Indian Constitution.
What are the alternatives to predictive policing?
Instead of relying solely on AI, law enforcement agencies should focus on.Community policing (engaging with local communities to prevent crime). Judicially monitored investigations. Fair and unbiased data collection practices.
Can predictive policing be regulated?
Yes, it can be regulated by: Implementing data protection laws. Ensuring judicial oversight. Requiring algorithmic transparency in law enforcement AI tools.
REFERENCES
Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 1.
People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) v. Union of India, AIR 1997 SC 568.
Ferguson, A. G. (2017). “The Rise of Big Data Policing: Surveillance, Race, and the Future of Law Enforcement.” NYU Press.
The Royal Statistical Society (2019), “Effectiveness of Predictive Policing Programs in Crime Prevention.”
