The CCG Privacy High Court Tracker is a resource consisting of decisions on the constitutional right to privacy passed by all High Courts in India. The Privacy High Court Tracker captures cases post the pronouncement of the Justice (Retd.) K.S. Puttaswamy vs. Union of India (Puttaswamy) judgment. In Puttaswamy, the Supreme Court of India reaffirmed the existence of the right to privacy in India’s Constitution as a fundamental right.
The Privacy High Court Tracker is a tool to enable lawyers, judges, policymakers, legislators, civil society organisations, academic and policy researchers and other relevant stakeholders, to engage with, understand and analyse the evolving privacy law and jurisprudence across India. The cases deal with the following aspects of privacy (1) autonomy, (2) bodily integrity, (3) data protection, (4) dignity, (5) informational privacy, (6) phone tapping, (7) press freedom, (8) right to know and access information, and (9) surveillance, search and seizure.
The tracker currently only consists of cases reported on Manupatra, and those reported upto 15 December 2023 (CCG will continue to update the tracker periodically). Only final judgements are included in the tracker, and not interim orders of the High Courts.
Show methodologyInformational Privacy || Orissa High Court
2 Judge
Decision Date - 16.08.2020
Citation - MANU/OR/0215/2020
Case Type - Writ Petition (PIL)
Case Status - Disposed.
Legal Provisions - Regulation 3 (ix) of the Odisha COVID-19 Regulations, 2020. S. 33(m) read with S. 20-A of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956
View Case
"The right to privacy of them, being implicit in Article 21 of the Constitution, i.e., right-to life and liberty though not absolute and subjected to reasonable restriction, considering the adverse impact of such disclosure of identity of a patient and also persons in quarantine as well as their family members, as stated hereinbefore, we hope and trust that the State shall take further steps if not already taken to keep the personal information masked by applying appropriate method if not there, such as, providing code number for keeping the details in anonymity and keep utmost confidentiality of such information in different intradepartmental communication, as from the different instances brought to our notice, we have reason to believe that there is pilferage of the personal details unauthorisedly in some cases by some persons. So also, we hope and trust that before disclosing the identity of Covid-19 infected persons or persons in quarantine in exceptional circumstances, as stated in the Regulation, to achieve the goal, the State shall also must-take note the fact that the same is subject to scrutiny of triple test prescribed in the case of Puttaswamy (supra) before invasion of such right to privacy of the persons in quarantine/Covid- 19 infected persons alive ordeal."
Read morePublic disclosure of identity of quarantined/Covid-19 infected persons is subject to scrutiny of the 'triple test' prescribed in the Puttaswamy case.
Read moreDignity, Informational Privacy || Orissa High Court
1 Judge
Decision Date - 23.11.2020
Citation - MANU/OR/0270/2020
Case Type - Bail Application
Case Status - Disposed.
Legal Provisions - The Information Technology (Reasonable Security Practices and Procedures and Sensitive Personal Data or Information) Rules, 2011
View Case
"Though the statute prescribes penal action for the accused for such crimes, the rights of the victim, especially, her right to privacy which is intricately linked to her right to get deleted in so far as those objectionable photos have been left unresolved. ... In such cases, either the victim herself or the prosecution may, if so advised, seek appropriate orders to protect the victim's fundamental right to privacy, by seeking appropriate orders to have such offensive posts erased from the public platform, irrespective of the ongoing criminal process."
Read moreThe right to privacy of a victim of sexual offences includes the right to have offensive posts erased from any public platform.
Read moreRight to Know and Access Information || Orissa High Court
2 Judge
Decision Date - 20.06.22
Citation - MANU/OR/0393/2022
Case Type - Civil Misc. Writ Petition
Case Status - Disposed
Legal provisions - S. 91, 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Article 19 of the Constitution Of India, 1950. S. 8, 9, 10, 11, 24 Right To Information Act, 2005
View Case
"Indeed, information pertaining to allegations of corruption and human rights violations has been legislatively identified by the RTI Act as a species as deserving of a different treatment in terms of disclosure, which is what is highlighted by the first proviso to both Section 24 (1) as well as Section 24 (4) of the RTI Act. If Section 8 is read with Section 24 of the RTI Act, as it has to since no provision can be viewed as otiose, then it becomes apparent that even while dealing with requests for information falling in the domain of Section 8 of the RTI Act, if such information pertains to allegations of human rights violations or corruption, regard will have to be had to the first provisos to Section 24 (1) Section 24 (4) of the RTI Act. "
Read moreInformation regarding all the activities undertaken by the State Vigilance Commission is not exempted from disclosure under the RTI Act. The Vigilance Department can be asked to disclose information that is of public interest such as corruption or human rights violation.
Read moreDignity, Bodily Integrity || Orissa High Court
1 Judge
Decision Date - 23.08.2023
Citation - JCRLA No.24 OF 2015
Case Type - Jail Criminal Appeal
Case Status - Appeal Allowed
Legal Provisions - Section 366, 376 of the Indian Penal Code
View Case
"The medical professionals while conducting medical examination on the victims of rape and sexual assault cases should desist from twofinger test in the private part of the victim which is also known as virginity test as the test violates the right of such victims to privacy, physical and mental integrity and dignity and hence, not at all permissible under the law. It is no less than adding an unforgettable insult to an unhealed injury. When a sexually active woman or a woman habituated to sexual intercourse can also be raped if the act of the accused comes within section 375 of I.P.C., this sort of test is certainly unscientific and traumatizing."
Read moreThe Court reiterated that the twofinger test is completely illegal and of no evidentiary value in cases of sexual violence, as well as a violation of the right to privacy of the victim.
Read moreAutonomy and Bodily Integrity || Orissa High Court
1 Judge
Decision Date - 23.08.2023
Citation - JCLRA. No. 79 of 2015
Case Type - Criminal Petition
Case Status -
Legal Provisions - Section 23 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012; Section 228A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 74 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015.
View Case
"In her report, P.W.11 further stated that the vaginal opening of the victim easily admitted two fingers. The medical professionals while conducting medical examination on the victims of rape and sexual assault cases should desist from two-finger test in the private part of the victim which is also known as virginity test as the test violates the right of such victims to privacy, physical and mental integrity and dignity and hence, not at all permissible under the law. It is no less than adding an unforgettable insult to an unhealed injury. When a sexually active woman or a woman habituated to sexual intercourse can also be raped if the act of the accused comes within section 375 of I.P.C., this sort of test is certainly unscientific and traumatizing."
Read moreThe two-finger test violates the right of sexual assault victims to privacy, physical and mental integrity, as well as dignity. The Court reiterated that it is not permissible under the law.
Read moreMethodology
The Privacy High Court Tracker has been developed using judgements pulled from the Manupatra case law database. Through its search function, CCG identified cases that relied upon the Puttaswamy judgment and were pertaining to the right to privacy, and filtered them by each of the 25 High Courts in India. These were then further examined to identify those cases whose decisions concerned a core aspect of privacy. CCG identified the following aspects of privacy (1) autonomy, (2) bodily integrity, (3) data protection, (4) dignity, (5) informational privacy, (6) phone tapping, (7) press freedom, (8) right to know and access information, and (9) surveillance, search and seizure. Cases where only incidental or passing observations or references were made to Puttaswamy and the right to privacy were not included in the tracker. The selected cases were then compiled into the database per High Court, with several details highlighted for ease of reference. These details consist of case name, decision date, case citation and number, case status, legal provisions involved, and bench strength. The tracker also includes select quotes concerning the right to privacy from each case, to assist users to more easily and quickly grasp the crux of the case.
For ease of access to the text of the judgments, each case on our tracker is linked to the Indian Kanoon version of the judgment (wherever available) or an alternative open-access version of the judgment text.
We welcome your feedback. In addition, you may write to us at - ccg@nludelhi.ac.in with the details of any privacy case we may not have included from any High Court in India.
