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 March 2024 (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 methodologySurveillance, Search and Seizure || Patna High Court
2 Judge
Decision Date - 02.12.2020
Citation - 2021 (1) BLJ 340, MANU/BH/0742/2020
Case Type - Civil Writ Jurisdiction
Case Status - Disposed.
Legal Provisions - S. 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961
View Case
"Search and seizure proceedings ... empowers the Revenue Department to bypass the privacy of an assessee or any individual, whom the Revenue has a 'reason to believe,' would hold some information regarding tax evasion activities. In light of this power which clearly encroaches against the fundamental right to life and personal liberty, in as much as their privacy is concerned, must be contained within the limits of the law. Hence a strict reading of these empowering sections is necessary to avoid the pitfall of granting unfettered powers to the Revenue Department."
Read moreSearch and Seizure operations with proper authorization do not violate right to privacy.
Read moreInformational Privacy, Right to Information || Patna High Court
2 Judge
Decision date - 18.06.2021
Citation - MANU/BH/0407/2021
Case type - Civil Writ Jurisdiction
Case status - Order passed
Legal provisions - S. 4, 10, 17 and 19 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969. S. 4 of the Right to Information Act, 2005.
View Case
"The Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 (Act No. 18 of 1969) and also the Right to Information Act, 2005, gives a right to a person in almost unequivocal terms of their access to information and therefore, the Digital Portals should be made accessible to the general public with regular and timely updates. It is needless to say that private information of deceased individuals will still be protected under the Right to Privacy read into Article 21 of the Constitution but has to be balanced with 'General public awareness' and information dissemination."" ""The information to be updated regularly on the digital portal shall be done in line with the right to privacy, recognized under the Constitution."
Read moreInformation can be updated on a digital portal, but the same must be done in line with the individual's right to privacy.
Read moreAutonomy || Patna High Court
2 Judge
Decision Date - 21.06.2022
Citation - MANU/BH/0712/2022
Case type - Civil Misc. Writ Petition
Case status - Disposed
Legal provisions - S.10(1), 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Article 19, 21 of the Constitution Of India, 1950
View Case
"We are mindful that choice inheres in the right to privacy as well, for which reference to Justice K S Puttaswamy v Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 1 is apt. A woman's choice of selecting her partner is a facet duly recognised by our Constitution".
Read moreInformational Privacy || Patna High Court
2 Judge
Order Date - 04.05.2023
Citation - 2023 SCC OnLine Pat 1273
Case Type - Writ Petition
Case Status - Disposed
Legal Provision - Article 21 of the Constitution of India, 1950
View Case
"We also see from the notification issued that the Government intends to share data with the leaders of different parties of the State Assembly, the ruling party and opposition party which is also a matter of great concern. There definitely arises the larger question of right to privacy, which the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held to be a facet of right to life."
Read moreThe power of State authorities to collect data must be balanced with the fundamental right to privacy, which is a facet of right to life. The State cannot conduct surveys with the intent to collect and share personal information with third-parties without a fair and reasonable procedure established for the same.
Read moreInformational Privacy || Patna High Court
2 Judge
Decision Date - 01.08.2023
Citation - Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 5542 of 2023, 2023 SCC OnLine Pat 2393
Case Type - Civil Writ Petition
Case Status - Petition Dismissed
Legal Provisions - Article 15, 16, 21, 162, 246, Schedule VII of the Constitution of India. Bihar Reservation of Vacancies in Posts And Services (SC/ST, OBC) Act, 1991
View Case
"...there are certain aspects of personal information, which fall under the phrase 'none of your business', meaning none other can seek such an information mandatorily from the citizens; especially not the State which has the might of its authority." "We find the action of the State to be perfectly valid, initiated with due competence, with the legitimate aim of providing 'Development with Justice'; as proclaimed in the address to both Houses and the actual survey to have neither exercised nor contemplated any coercion to divulge the details and having passed the test of proportionality, thus not having violated the rights of privacy of the individual especially since it is in furtherance of a 'compelling public interest' which in effect is the 'legitimate State interest'."
Read moreCaste survey by the state government for the purpose of uplifting the marginalised, requiring disclosure of religion, caste and monthly income, is not a violation of right to privacy.
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.
