SC to Examine Legality of Face-Recognition Tech Used on NEET-UG Protesters
The Supreme Court on Thursday (August 13, 2026) agreed to examine a plea filed by Rajya Sabha Member of Parliament A.A. Rahim challenging the use of facial recognition technology and other surveillance measures against students and protesters involved in the NEET-UG paper-leak protests. The protests, which began in July, have been linked to the Cockroach Janta Party and have sparked intense debate over police tactics during demonstrations.
A three-judge Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant said the petition would be tagged with the main petitions related to the NEET-UG protests. Those petitions have already raised questions about the police crackdown on students, including the use of pellet guns. Senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy, appearing for Mr. Rahim along with advocate Subhash Chandran, presented the case before the Bench.
The petition argues that the deployment of facial recognition technology and covert surveillance on peaceful protesters is unconstitutional. It specifically points to the automated, algorithmic extraction and matching of biometric identifiers of thousands of protesters, and the linking of this data with permanent national criminal databases.
According to the plea, since the beginning of the sit-in on July 20, the Delhi Police have subjected protesters, journalists, and ordinary citizens to continuous and pervasive biometric surveillance. The surveillance is said to have been carried out through CCTV cameras, drones, a mobile command and control vehicle, and hand-held devices. Footage was processed in real time using automated facial recognition technology through the 'Ikshana' vehicle and 'AjnaLens' smart spectacles. Fingerprints were reportedly collected and matched using the National Crime Records Bureau's 'Abhigyan' mobile application against the National Automated Fingerprint Identification System (NAFIS).
Ms. Guruswamy told the court that the data was gathered without permission and hosted by private agencies. This, she said, violated the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Rules, the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), and other legal provisions. "One maps your face. Spectacles are used and a vehicle is also used. The data is taken without permission. Then private entities host the data in violation of DPDP Rules, CrPC and a variety of things," she submitted.
The plea further contends that the surveillance was conducted in a "complete legal vacuum." It asserts that neither the Delhi Police's standing orders governing protests nor the Criminal Procedure (Identification) Act, 2022 authorise the biometric surveillance of persons attending a lawful assembly. The petition argues that such actions infringe upon fundamental rights, including the right to privacy, which the Supreme Court has previously declared a constitutionally protected right.
The case comes amid ongoing scrutiny of the National Testing Agency and the conduct of NEET-UG 2026. The exam, which determines admission to undergraduate medical courses, was hit by allegations of paper leaks, triggering nationwide protests. The Supreme Court has been hearing multiple petitions related to the handling of the protests and the examination process.
The court's decision to tag Mr. Rahim's plea with existing petitions means the issue of biometric surveillance will be considered alongside broader questions of police conduct during the protests. Legal observers note that this case could set important precedents regarding the use of advanced surveillance technologies in public order management. It also highlights the growing concerns about the absence of a comprehensive legal framework for facial recognition in India, a matter that has been debated in various forums.
The next hearing date has not been announced. The court has directed that the matter be listed with the other NEET-UG petitions, ensuring a consolidated hearing on both the procedural and substantive aspects of the case.
