Should the Government Be Allowed to Track Our Location Without Consent?

Proposal to Make Satellite-Based Location Tracking Always Active on Smartphones

December 8, 2025

The central government is weighing a proposal to require smartphone manufacturers to keep satellite-based location tracking permanently active on all devices sold in the country. This would allow law enforcement and investigative agencies to access our precise, real-time location data, a step no other country has taken so far.

The proposal has been put forward by the Cellular Operators Association of India, which represents major telecom providers including Reliance Jio and Bharti Airtel, and calls for the use of Assisted Global Positioning System (A-GPS) technology, Reuters reported.

It comes in the wake of public backlash against a now-withdrawn government directive that had required phone makers to preload a state-run cyber safety app, Sanchar Saathi. That directive was rescinded after civil rights activists and opposition leaders raised alarms about the risk of surveillance.

The new plan is facing firm resistance from Apple, Google and Samsung, who argue that it would undermine our privacy. The proposal demands that A-GPS be permanently enabled on all phones, without giving us the option to turn it off. At present, location services on smartphones are opt-in and usually activate only during app use or in emergencies. Making them compulsory would allow the government to track all users with metre-level precision at all times, regardless of consent.

The government wants tighter surveillance because it is unhappy with the accuracy of location data from telecom operators. Right now, tracking relies on cell tower signals, which only show a rough location and are often not precise. This makes it harder to carry out investigations or respond quickly in emergencies.

In a letter to the Indian government, lobbying group India Cellular and Electronics Association, which represents Apple and Google, described the proposal as a “regulatory overreach,” which means a government or authority going beyond its legal or reasonable limits in controlling or interfering with people’s rights or businesses. The letter argued that the technology was not designed for surveillance and warned of serious legal, privacy and security consequences if implemented.

Privacy advocates and cybersecurity experts have called the proposed measure “dedicated surveillance devices” and “pretty horrifying.”

For journalists, lawyers and activists, it compromises source confidentiality, legal privilege and the freedom to organise or investigate without exposure. For citizens, it strips away control over their movements and creates the risk of being tracked or profiled without any legal safeguards. These objections challenge the assumption that the government can always be trusted, has a clean record, and that all communities and interest groups feel equally secure in the country.

Mandating device-level tracking without explicit consent could violate constitutional protections under Article 21, which guarantees the right to life and, as per a 2017 Supreme Court ruling, it includes the right to privacy as a fundamental right. In that case (Puttaswamy), the court held that any intrusion into personal data must be legal, necessary and proportionate to a legitimate aim.

There is a well-established principle in constitutional law that the rights of an entire population cannot be curtailed because of the wrongdoing of a few. Indian jurisprudence has long recognised the presumption of innocence as a core value, meaning no individual should be treated as a suspect without specific cause. Subjecting all smartphone users to constant location tracking, regardless of any suspicion or legal process, directly undermines this principle. It treats every citizen as a potential threat, replacing targeted investigation with indiscriminate surveillance.

Treating mass surveillance as a default in the name of national interest also runs counter to the rule of law. It relies on the assumption that the state will always act fairly, with restraint, and in equal protection of all communities. That assumption cannot be taken for granted. In any democratic society, laws must be framed with safeguards that account for abuse, not with blind faith in authority. The demand for permanent tracking not only removes individual consent, it removes the legal thresholds that are meant to protect all citizens from misuse of power.

The proposal also raises questions about the balance of power between the government, the telecom sector and global technology firms. By forcing device manufacturers to reconfigure how their products operate, the state would be asserting control over technology standards and user autonomy. This could invite scrutiny from international watchdogs and potentially affect the willingness of global tech firms to operate in India’s vast mobile market.

You have just read a News Briefing by Newsreel Asia, written to cut through the noise and present a single story for the day that matters to you. Certain briefings, based on media reports, seek to keep readers informed about events across India, others offer a perspective rooted in humanitarian concerns and some provide our own exclusive reporting. We encourage you to read the News Briefing each day. Our objective is to help you become not just an informed citizen, but an engaged and responsible one.