Author: sushmita patra , student of Sister nivedita university ( kolkata )
To the point
It is one of the most important judgments by the supreme court of India , stated on August 24th 2017 . “In this case the court declared that the right to privacy is a fundamental right under article 21 , 19 and 14 of the constitution of India . Which means everyone has the right to keep their information personal and no one, not even the government, can interfere without legal reason” . The court also overruled the old cases M.P Sharma V. Satish Chandra(1954) and kharak singh V. State of U.P.(1962) which had earlier denied privacy as a right.
use of legal Jargon
Article 21( Right to life and personal liberty ) : “It states that no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law ” . In the case of Puttaswamy V.union of India , the supreme court said that the right to privacy is a part of article 21, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty . Which means privacy is a fundamental right for every person in India .
Doctrine of proportionality : It is a legal principle which means that any action taken by the government must be appropriate and not excessive in relation to the goal it aims to achieve.
Fundamental right : These are the basic rights and protections that every person in India is entitled to. These rights are guaranteed by the Constitution. They are designed to ensure that individuals can live with dignity, freedom, and equality.
Overruling precedent : In earlier cases -M.p Sharma ( 1954 ) and Kharak simgh (1962) – the supreme court had said that the right to privacy is not a fundamental right . Back then , the judges interpreted the constitution in a very narrow way.
But by 2017 ,our society , technology and understanding of human rights had changed a lot. In the digital age smartphones, aadhaar , social media and personal data are everywhere, Privacy has become a much bigger and more sensitive issue.
In the Puttaswamy case, a nine judge bench of the Supreme Court came together and took a fresh look at those old rulings. They said: “Those earlier judgments didn’t fully understand the Constitution or the importance of privacy. People have a right to live with dignity, and privacy is a big part of that.” The Court then overruled the old decisions and made it clear that the Right to Privacy is a part of the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution—especially under Article 21.
The proof
Background of the case : K.S. Puttaswamy, a retired judge, filed a petition in court challenging the Aadhaar Act. His main concern was that the government was collecting sensitive personal information—like fingerprints and eye scans—from people, which he believed violated their right to privacy.
“The Aadhaar Act was meant to give each person in India a unique ID number to help them access government services more easily. While the intention was to improve efficiency and reduce fraud, it raised serious concerns about how safely this personal data would be stored and used”.
Legal context : Puttaswamy argued that such deep data collection is not only intrusive but could also be misused by the government or private companies. “He believed this violated the fundamental right to privacy, which he said was a core part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution”.
The case became a major one, and the Supreme Court listened to arguments from both sides. The government defended Aadhaar, saying it was needed to reduce corruption and make sure subsidies and services reached the right people. But the Court also had to consider how digital technology affects people’s freedom and control over their personal lives.
In 2017, August 24th the Supreme Court gave its historic judgment: it declared that the right to privacy is a fundamental right under the Constitution. The Court said privacy is essential to human dignity and necessary for people to fully enjoy their other rights.
Abstract
In 2017 ,the Supreme Court of India made a historic ruling in the case of Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, declaring that the right to privacy is a fundamental right protected under the Constitution. This decision was a major change from earlier cases that had denied privacy as a constitutional right. The case was sparked by concerns over the Aadhaar Act, which required the government to collect sensitive personal information, such as fingerprints and eye scans. The Court recognized that privacy is crucial for maintaining human dignity and for individuals to fully enjoy their other rights. By affirming the importance of privacy in our increasingly digital world, the ruling underscored the need to safeguard personal information from misuse, marking a significant evolution in how privacy is understood and protected in India.
Case law
M P Sharma v. Satish Chandra (1954)
In this case, some individuals faced serious charges, including fraud and forgery, as specified in various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The police obtained permission to search their properties and seized documents as evidence. The individuals being searched (the petitioners) claimed that this search violated their fundamental rights
The Supreme Court (SC) of India ruled that the government has the authority to conduct searches and seizures to ensure public safety and security. The court highlighted that this power is crucial for the state to protect society, but it must be governed by law. Therefore, the court believed there was no basis to interpret existing rights in a way that would create a new right to privacy.
Kharak Singh v. State of U.P. & Ors (1963) In this case, Kharak Singh had been accused of a serious crime (dacoity) in 1941 but was released due to Insufficient evidence. However, the police kept a record on him, meaning he was under constant surveillance. As a result, police officers and village guards frequently visited his home, knocking loudly and disturbing him, even at night. Feeling harassed, Kharak Singh decided to challenge this situation in court, arguing that it violated his rights under the Constitution.
The Supreme Court ruled that Kharak Singh’s right to move freely was not being violated simply because the police knocked on his door at night. The court explained that his ability to move around was not actually hindered or harmed by these actions.
Conclusion
In the Puttaswamy case the Supreme Court clearly said that every person has a fundamental right to privacy—a right that is just as important as the right to life or freedom. It recognized that in today’s digital world, where so much of our personal information is online, protecting our privacy is more important than ever. This judgment made sure that our personal space and data are protected under the Constitution.
FAQs
Q1) Why was the right to privacy questioned in the first place?
– Earlier judgments like M.P. Sharma (1954) and Kharak Singh (1962) had denied privacy as a fundamental right. But with the rise of technology and data collection, people became more aware and concerned about how their personal information is being used and stored.
Q2) What did the Supreme Court decide in this case?
– The Supreme Court ruled on August 24, 2017, that the right to privacy is a fundamental right under Articles 21 (right to life and personal liberty), 19, and 14 of the Constitution. This means the government cannot intrude into someone’s private life without legal justification.
Q3) How is Article 21 connected to the right to privacy?
– Article 21 guarantees every person the right to life and personal liberty. The Court clarified that privacy is an essential part of personal liberty, and therefore, it is protected under Article 21.
Q4) What is the Doctrine of Proportionality and how is it used here?
– It’s a legal rule that says government actions must be balanced—they should not go beyond what is necessary to achieve a goal. In this case, the Court used it to say: Yes, the government can collect data, but it must do so in a fair and limited way
