JUSTICE K.S.PUTTASWAMY(RETD) vs UNION OF INDIA. Supreme Court, 24-08-2017
| Judge | HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE, HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI, HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR, HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHUSHAN |
| Court | Supreme Court (India) |
| Docket Number | W.P.(C) No.-000494-000494 / 2012 |
| Parties | JUSTICE K.S.PUTTASWAMY(RETD)UNION OF INDIA |
| Date | 24 August 2017 |
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO 494 OF 2012
JUSTICE K S PUTTASWAMY (RETD.),
AND ANR. ..Petitioners
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..Respondents
WITH
T.C. (CIVIL) NO 151 OF 2013
T.C. (CIVIL) NO 152 OF 2013
W.P.(CIVIL) NO 833 OF 2013
W.P.(CIVIL) NO 829 OF 2013
W.P.(CIVIL) NO 932 OF 2013
CONMT. PET. (CIVIL) NO 144 OF 2014 IN W.P.(C) NO. 494/2012
T.P.(CIVIL) NO 313 OF 2014
T.P.(CIVIL) NO 312 OF 2014
S.L.P(CRL.) NO.2524/2014
W.P.(CIVIL) NO.37/2015
W.P.(CIVIL) NO.220/2015
REPORTABLE
Digitally signed by
PARVEEN KUMAR
Date: 2017.08.24
12:36:27 IST
Reason:
Signature Not Verified
2
CONMT. PET. (C)NO.674/2015 IN W.P.(C) NO.829/2013
T.P.(CIVIL)NO.921/2015
CONMT.PET.(C)NO.470/2015 IN W.P.(C) NO.494/2012
CONMT.PET.(C)NO.444/2016 IN W.P.(C) NO.494/2012
CONMT.PET.(C)NO.608/2016 IN W.P.(C) NO.494/2012
W.P.(CIVIL) NO.797/2016
CONMT.PET.(C)NO.844/2017 IN W.P.(C) NO.494/2012
W.P. (C) NO. 342/ 2017
AND WITH W.P.(C) NO.000372/2017
J U D G M E N T
Dr D Y CHANDRACHUD, J
This judgment has been divided into sections to facilitate analysis. They are :
A The reference
B Decision in M P Sharma
C Decision in Kharak Singh
D Gopalan doctrine: fundamental rights as isolated silos
E Cooper and Maneka: Interrelationship between rights
F Origins of privacy
G Natural and inalienable rights
H Evolution of the privacy doctrine in India
I The Indian Constitution
• Preamble
• Jurisprudence on dignity
3
• Fundamental Rights cases
• No waiver of Fundamental Rights
• Privacy as intrinsic to freedom and liberty
• Discordant Notes : (i) ADM Jabalpur
(ii) Suresh Koushal
J India’s commitments under International law
K Comparative law on privacy
(i) UK decisions
(ii) US Supreme Court decisions
(iii) Constitutional right to privacy in South Africa
(iv) Constitutional right to privacy in Canada
(v) Privacy under the European Convention on Human Rights and
the European Charter
(vi) Decisions of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights
L Criticisms of the privacy doctrine
a Thomson’s Reductionism
b Posner’s Economic critique
c Bork’s critique
d Feminist critique
M Constituent Assembly and privacy: limits of originalist interpretation
N Is the statutory protection to privacy reason to deny a constitutional right?
O Not an elitist construct
P Not just a common law right
Q Substantive Due Process
R Essential nature of privacy
S Informational privacy
T Conclusions
To continue reading
Request your trial