Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v Union of India

Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v Union of India was filed in 2012 by Justice K.S. Puttaswamy, a retired judge of the Karnataka High Court, who challenged the constitutionality of the Aadhaar project. The case was brought before the Supreme Court in the wake of concerns about the invasion of privacy through the widespread collection and storage of personal data under the Aadhaar scheme. However, the judgement went beyond the scope of Aadhaar and addressed the more fundamental question of whether the right to privacy could be considered a fundamental right under the Constitution of India.

The Supreme Court, in its unanimous decision, held that the right to privacy is a fundamental right, integral to the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. This decision overruled earlier judgements that had denied the existence of such a right. It was a game-changer in the context of personal freedoms in India.

The Bench and Legal Representation

The case was heard by a nine-judge bench, comprising:

• Chief Justice J.S. Khehar
• Justice D.Y. Chandrachud
• Justice Abdul Nazeer
• Justice Rohinton Nariman
• Justice S.K. Kaul
• Justice Sharad Bobde
• Justice Jasti Chelameswar
• Justice Abhay Sapre
• Justice A.K. Sikri

The petitioners in the case included Justice K.S. Puttaswamy and several civil society activists, represented by prominent lawyers such as Shyam Divan, Kapil Sibal, Gopal Subramanium, K.V. Vishwanathan, and Meenakshi Arora. The respondents included the Union of India and several states, represented by Attorney General K.K. Venugopal and other government lawyers.

Facts of Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v Union of India

The case originally arose out of the challenge to the Aadhaar scheme, which was introduced by the UPA government in 2009. The scheme aimed to provide a unique identification number to every Indian resident, which would be linked to biometric data, including fingerprints and iris scans. Over time, concerns arose regarding the potential misuse of this vast amount of personal data. These concerns became more prominent when it was revealed that the data could be shared with various private entities, raising questions about the right to privacy of individuals.

In 2015, a three-judge bench, comprising Justices Chelameswar, Bobde, and C. Nagappan, ordered that the matter be referred to a larger bench. They sought to examine the correctness of earlier judgements in M.P. Sharma v. Satish Chandra (1954) and Kharak Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1964), which had denied the right to privacy as a fundamental right under the Constitution. The bench, acknowledging the importance of the issue, referred the matter to a larger bench.

The case eventually reached the nine-judge bench in 2017, marking the beginning of a historic legal battle.

Key Issues in the Puttaswamy Case

The primary issues that were considered by the Supreme Court in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v Union of India were:

1. Whether the decision in M.P. Sharma v. Satish Chandra (1954), which held that privacy was not a fundamental right, was correct in law.
2. Whether the decision in Kharak Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1964), which similarly denied privacy as a fundamental right, should be revisited and overruled.
3. Whether the right to privacy is an intrinsic part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 and a part of the freedoms guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution.

These issues were fundamental in determining the scope of individual rights and the state’s power to regulate personal information.

Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v Union of India Judgement

On August 24, 2017, the nine-judge bench delivered its unanimous judgement, which recognised the right to privacy as a fundamental right under the Indian Constitution. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, delivering the majority opinion, held that the right to privacy is protected under Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty) and is an essential aspect of the freedoms guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution.

The court overruled the earlier decisions in M.P. Sharma v. Satish Chandra and Kharak Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, both of which had denied privacy as a fundamental right. The judgement clarified that privacy is integral to the dignity and autonomy of individuals and cannot be compromised without adequate justification. The court established that any encroachment on the right to privacy must meet the following three conditions:

1. Legality: There must be a law that authorises the invasion of privacy.
2. Necessity: The state must have a legitimate aim to justify the infringement.
3. Proportionality: The means used to achieve the aim must be proportional to the infringement.

The judgement also emphasised that privacy extends to all spheres of life, including personal, familial, and sexual orientation. It underscored that sexual orientation is a core aspect of an individual’s privacy, and any discrimination based on it violates the right to dignity and equality under Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution.

Impact on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity

One of the most notable aspects of the Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v Union of India decision was its direct impact on issues related to sexual orientation and gender identity. The Supreme Court held that discrimination against individuals based on sexual orientation is deeply offensive to their dignity and self-worth. The court recognised that sexual orientation is an essential attribute of privacy and that every individual has the right to decide their sexual preferences without interference from the state.

This part of the judgement laid the groundwork for the eventual decriminalisation of homosexuality in India through the Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018) case, where the Supreme Court struck down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, which criminalised consensual homosexual acts between adults.

The ADM Jabalpur Case Overruled

The Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v Union of India judgement also took a bold step in overruling the ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (1976) case. In ADM Jabalpur, the Supreme Court had ruled that during a state of emergency, the right to life and personal liberty could be suspended. The Puttaswamy judgement reaffirmed the sanctity of the right to life, declaring that it is inalienable and cannot be suspended even during an emergency.

The judgement reminded the government that the right to life and personal liberty exists independently of the Constitution and is an inherent natural right. The court firmly rejected any notion that these rights could be overridden by the executive or the legislature.

Aftermath and Implications

The Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v Union of India case has had profound implications for several key issues in Indian law and society. The recognition of privacy as a fundamental right paved the way for greater protection of personal data and digital rights. It also strengthened individual autonomy, particularly in areas such as sexual orientation, marriage, and reproductive rights.

In addition to the Navtej Singh Johar decision, the judgement also played a crucial role in the Joseph Shine v. Union of India (2018) case, where the Supreme Court decriminalised adultery, further affirming the protection of privacy in personal relationships.

The case has been cited in numerous subsequent rulings, ensuring that privacy remains a critical part of the discourse on fundamental rights in India. It also triggered debates on the regulation of technology, especially in the context of data protection and privacy laws.

Conclusion

Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v Union of India is a landmark case that solidified the right to privacy as a fundamental right in India. The case addressed important issues surrounding personal autonomy, state surveillance, and individual freedoms, while striking down outdated precedents that had denied the existence of privacy as a constitutional right. The decision not only reaffirmed the significance of privacy in modern society but also opened the doors for further reforms in areas like sexual orientation, data protection, and reproductive rights.

By recognising privacy as a fundamental right, the Supreme Court ensured that Indian citizens would be better protected against unwarranted state interference in their personal lives. The judgement in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v Union of India remains a cornerstone in the protection of individual liberties in India and continues to shape the country’s legal and social landscape.

Researchers: Daman Preet Kaur (Student, Punjabi University Patiala), Damini Sharma (Student, School Of Law, Bennett University), and Nisarg Trivedi (Student, School Of Law, Bennett University).

Author: Aishwarya Agrawal