- 5 A A suspect to be of value (whether by itself or together with anything else) to the investigation of any offence that the person has committed or is reasonably suspected of having committed: B C Provided that nothing in this subsection shall be construed in diminution of the powers of search conferred by any particular warrant.” (emphasis added) D E B C D E 11. Thus, under this provision, it is lawful for a police officer to F search without warrant “any other article or chattel” found on an arrested F G person or at or about the place of the arrest and which the officer may G “reasonably suspect” to be of value to the investigation of any offence H I that the person has been committed or is “reasonably suspected” of having committed. Parties are not in dispute that it must be implied in H I this search power that the police could generally also examine the object J J so seized of. K L K B2. The grounds of judicial review 12. L In this judicial review, the applicant raises two grounds of M M 1 challenge: N N (1) The Constitutional Ground: insofar as if section 50(6) authorizes the police to search without warrant the digital O O content of a mobile phone seized on arrest, it is P unconstitutional as it disproportionately infringes the right to privacy protected under BOR14 and BL30. Q (2) R Q The Construction Ground: alternatively, on a proper construction, the digital content of a seized mobile phone is S R S 1 T P At the hearing, given the change of circumstances, the applicant has rightly decided not to pursue the third judicial review ground set out in the Form 86 that the Decision was in any event illegal as there was no reasonable basis to suspect that the Subject Mobile Phones were of value to the investigation of any offences in connection with the applicant. T U U V V