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 methodologyAutonomy || Rajasthan High Court (Jodhpur Bench)
1 Judge
Decision date - 21.02.2022
Case Citation - MANU/RH/0354/2022
Case Type - Writ Petition (Civil)
Case Status - Disposed
Legal Provisions - S. 5, S. 23 of the Maintenance And Welfare Of Parents And Senior Citizens Act, 2007
View Case
"It is pertinent that the duty prescribed under sub-rule (2) is only to ensure that life and property of the senior citizens are protected. The same cannot be stretched to such an extent that it translates into a power to scoop out the children who have been living in shared accommodation out of natural bonding which at some point of time existed. Rule 20, if read in its entirety with its innate intention, gives a clear indication that being a piece of welfare legislation, it adjures the administration (District Magistrate) to avert threat of life and property of the senior citizens, should any such eventuality arise."
Read moreAs per the Rajasthan Maintenance of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2010, it shall be the duty of the District Magistrate to ensure that life and property of senior citizens of the district are protected and they are able to live with security and dignity. However, the duty of the Magistrate is not to the extent of ordering eviction of the children of elderly parents from their homes, even if it is with the view of providing security to the parents.
Read moreBodily integrity || Rajasthan High Court (Jodhpur Bench)
1 Judge
Decision Date - 26.05.2023
Citation - MANU/RH/0763/2023
Case Type - Writ Petition
Case Status - Dismissed
Legal Provision - S. 112, 114 Indian Evidence Act, 1872; Article 21 of the Constitution of India
View Case
"This Court also finds that the DNA Test is invading upon the rights of a child, which may range from affecting his property rights, right to lead a dignified life, right to privacy and right to have the confidence and happiness of being showered with love and affection by both parents. This case has to be seen through the prism of the child and not through the prism of the cantankerously fighting parents. This Court is of the firm opinion that the child cannot be used as a pawn in a divorce litigation, where either of the parents want to get rid of the spouse, while sacrificing the crucial rights of the child to a dignified parenthood, which shall not only cause an unfathomable misery upon the rights of the child, but also create a permanent dent in his existence/Psyche"
Read moreA parent cannot compel their child to undergo a DNA test, when the parent's sole intention is to use the results of the test to seek divorce on the grounds of adultery. DNA tests infringe upon the right to privacy of individuals, and children cannot be compelled to undergo such tests if it is not in their best interests.
Read moreDignity || Rajasthan High Court (Jodhpur Bench)
1 Judge
Decision Date - 10.08.2023
Citation - S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6847/2023
Case Type - Civil Writ Petition
Case Status - Petition dismissed
Legal Provisions - Article 14, 21 of the Constitution of India
View Case
"Apparently, there was no error in the assessment of the petitioners by the respondents, but this Court is unable to come over the shock, it got on seeing the parameters laid down by the respondents for ascertaining physical standards of women candidates. This Court cannot, but refrain from observing that the respondents’ act of setting up chest measurement to be a criterion, particularly for female candidates, is absolutely arbitrary, rather outrageous to say the least. It is a clear dent on a lady’s dignity and right of privacy guaranteed under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India."
Read moreThe minimum chest size requirement for recruitment of women into the Forest Guard is a violation of right to privacy, dignity and bodily autonomy of a woman.
Read moreDignity || Rajasthan High Court (Jodhpur Bench)
1 Judge
Decision Date - 26.05.2023
Citation - S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1015/2023
Case Type - Civil Writ Petition
Case Status - Petition dismissed
Legal Provisions - Section 112 of Indian Evidence Act. Article 21 of the Constitution of India
View Case
This Court further observes that for protecting the best interest of the child, the DNA Paternity test cannot be allowed in a routine manner, and that the same can only be permitted in exceptional circumstances, and as per the law laid down by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Aparna Ajinkya Firodia (supra)... This Court also finds that the DNA Test is invading upon the rights of a child, which may range from affecting his property rights, right to lead a dignified life, right to privacy and right to have the confidence and happiness of being showered with love and affection by both parents.
Read moreA DNA Paternity Test of the Child is an invasion of several of the right of child, including, property rights, right to lead a dignified life, right to privacy. The Court reiterated the earlier Supreme Court in Aparna Ajinkya ruling that a DNA Paternity Test can be permitted only in exceptional circumstances, keeping in mind the best interest of the child.
Read moreDignity and Informational Privacy || Rajasthan High Court (Jodhpur Bench)
1 Judge
Decision Date - 13.12.2023
Citation - S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9681/2023
Case Type - Single Bench Civil Writ Petition Case Status - Petition disposed.
Legal Provisions - Sec.25 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890.
View Case
"Before parting, I may hasten to address certain privacy concerns arising out in the matters of this kind. The Registry of this Court as well as the Family Courts in the State of Rajasthan need to be cautious in future to ensure that they must respect the privacy of the parties in matrimonial disputes by ensuring that their identities are not disclosed and names of the parties are shown as XX vs YY or otherwise, the same are masked. The Registry is directed to issue an appropriate circular to the Family Courts to strictly carry out compliance thereof."
Read moreThe Court issued directions to the registry to mask names of parties involved in matrimonial disputes.
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.
