SC declares Right to Privacy as a fundamental right
New Delhi, Aug 24 (PTI) In a landmark verdict, the right to privacy was today
declared a fundamental right under the Constitution by the Supreme Court, which
said "privacy is the constitutional core of human dignity".
The judgement, which will have a bearing on the
lives of all Indians, said that "the right to privacy is protected as an
intrinsic part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 and
as a part of the freedoms guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution."
The top court also ruled that like other
fundamental rights, the right to privacy was not absolute and any encroachment
will have to withstand the touchstone of permissible restrictions.
A nine-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief
Justice J S Khehar, which delivered as many as six concurring verdicts,
overruled the contrary apex court verdicts delivered in 1950 and 1962 in the M
P Sharma and the Kharak Singh cases holding that right to privacy was not part
of the Constitution.
The top court rejected the NDA government's
vehement contention that there was no general or fundamental right to privacy
under the Constitution.
The lead judgement, penned by Justice D Y Chandrachud
for himself, the CJI, Justices R K Agrawal and S A Nazeer, however, asked the
government to examine and put in place a "robust regime" for data
protection in the modern era.
However, the top court gave a ray of hope to
embattled government, whose Aadhaar scheme is under intense scrutiny over
privacy infringements, said, "We commend to the Union Government the need
to examine and put into place a robust regime for data protection.
"The creation of such a regime requires a
careful and sensitive balance between individual interests and legitimate
concerns of the state. The legitimate aims of the state would include for
instance protecting national security, preventing and investigating crime,
encouraging innovation and the spread of knowledge, and preventing the
dissipation of social welfare benefits".
Besides the four judges including the CJI,
Justices J Chelameswar, S A Bobde, Abhay Manohar Sapre, Rohinton Fali Nariman
and Sanjay Kishan Kaul wrote separate, but concurring verdicts running into 547-pages.
The judgement was welcomed by leading legal
experts, including Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad, who is himself a lawyer.
Noted jurist Soli Sorabjee said "no fundamental right is absolute. It is
always subject to reasonable restrictions".
While senior advocate Indira Jaising said
"privacy is fundamental. It certainly has an impact on the day-to-day
life. This verdict prevents any kind of snooping," senior lawyer Kapil
Sibal observed that like individual freedom, "individual house, marriages,
sexual orientation, right to space, right to move freely, right to eat what an
individual likes, right to be left alone are protected both within the home and
at public places to the extent necessary."
The CJI pronounced the summary of concurring
verdicts in a packed courtroom at 10.35 AM and said, "the decision in M P
Sharma (1950) which holds that the right to privacy is not protected by the
Constitution stands over-ruled.
"The decision in Kharak Singh (1962) to the
extent that it holds that the right to privacy is not protected by the
Constitution stands over-ruled".
The bench put at rest the persistent query as to
where Right to Privacy, if recognised as a fundamental right, would be placed
under Part III (which refers to such rights) the Constitution.
It said that right to privacy was protected as
an intrinsic part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21
and rather, it can be traced to entire Part III as and as a part of all the
fundamental rights.
He then proceeded to declare that all verdicts,
which recognised privacy as a key component of fundamental rights, delivered
post the M P Sharma and the Kharak Singh laid down "the correct position
in law".
Justice Chandrachud, in his verdict, dealt
extensively with findings arrived at in the M P Sharma judgement that had held
that in the absence of a provision similar to the Fourth Amendment to the US
Constitution, the right to privacy cannot be read into the provisions of
Article 20(3) of the Constitution.
"The judgment does not specifically
adjudicate on whether a right to privacy would arise from any of the other
provisions of the rights guaranteed by Part III including Article 21 and
Article 19.
"The observation that privacy is not a
right guaranteed by the Indian Constitution is not reflective of the correct
position. M P Sharma is overruled to the extent to which it indicates to the
contrary," the verdict said.
Referring to the 1962 Kharak Singh judgement,
the verdict said it was "correctly held that the content of the expression
life under Article 21 means not merely the right to a person s 'animal
existence' and that the expression personal liberty is a guarantee against
invasion into the sanctity of a person s home or an intrusion into personal security."
"The first part of the decision in Kharak
Singh which invalidated domiciliary visits at night on the ground that they
violated ordered liberty is an implicit recognition of the right to privacy.
The second part of the decision, however, which holds that the right to privacy
is not a guaranteed right under our Constitution, is not reflective of the
correct position...
"Kharak Singh to the extent that it holds
that the right to privacy is not protected under the Indian Constitution is
overruled," it said.
The bench then said that life and personal
liberty are "inalienable rights" and they are "inseparable from
a dignified human existence".
"Privacy with its attendant values assures
dignity to the individual and it is only when life can be enjoyed with dignity
can liberty be of true substance. Privacy ensures the fulfilment of dignity and
is a core value which the protection of life and liberty is intended to
achieve," the verdict said.
0 Comments