Before we learn into an entire argument about the Right to Privacy first, we
bear to endure what the term Privacy means. "Right to be left alone; the right
of a person to be free from any unwarranted publicity; the right to live without
any unwarranted interference by the public in matters with which the public is
not necessarily concerned," as per Black's Law Dictionary. Data privacy is an
accomplished affair of concern currently.
People are affected by and addicted to this internet, we all like more online
deals and deals. And why not? It is simple and makes life smoother. But then's
the deal, every logical thing has a harsh verity. Then, we may learn a fluent
way to guide a sophisticated life through this internet, but clearly at the
charge of our privacy. According to Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, "no
person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except by the procedure
established by law."
The tenure" life" refers to all sides of life that contribute to a man's life
being expressive, complete, and worthwhile. MP Sharma's case was bonded to the
hunt for documents in the fate of examinations into Dalmia Jain Airways Ltd.ís
business. The judges were to decide whether the government's right to search and
seizure was subject to constitutional limitations and whether this would violate
the right to privacy. The eight-judge panel, which included then-Chief Justice
Mehar Chand Mahajan, said in its decision that "there is no justification for
importing a completely different fundamental right into it through some strained
The court ruled that" privacy wasn't a naturally warranted right." still, it
held that Article 21(right to life) was the depository of residual rights and
honored the common law right to privacy. still, the condition of having
domiciliary visits was supposed unconstitutional. Many governments regard
privacy to be a basic human right, and data protection regulations exist to
preserve that right. Individuals must trust that their data will be managed
carefully to engage in online activities.
The decision by the Supreme Court has given a much-needed boost to the
protection of our privacy but it is in the end, inadequate. Privacy is a
person's right to be left alone in matters that are not necessarily of public
Anybody can enjoy the freedom of movement anywhere but if the moment is Being
tracked then how free is it?
Aadhar card, Paytm, Namo app, Cambridge Analytica There is one thing that is
very common among the controversy that has risen about all of these apps in
recent times it is alleged that all of these apps are trying to steal your data
so what's in your data the Cambridge Analytica controversy was in the entire
world this had shocked the government so it's high time now we need data privacy
right in our country
Before we begin a comprehensive study of the Right to Privacy, we must first
define the term Privacy. "Right to be left alone; the right of a person to be
free from any unwarranted publicity; the right to live without any unwarranted
interference by the public in matters with which the public is not necessarily
concerned," as per Black's Law Dictionary.
According to Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, "No person shall be deprived
of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by
law". After reading Article 21, it was determined that the term "life"
encompasses all parts of existence that contribute to a man's life being
meaningful, full, and worth living.
A few years ago, potato farmers in Uttar Pradesh wanted to protest what was
happening to their fallen potatoes outside the homes of government officials.
The Uttar Pradesh administration was enraged by this and set out to find out who
Can you imagine it being 10 or 20 individuals who must have
discarded it, but 9980 people phone all their discussions, whatever they must be
talking about, being heard? In another instance, the Andhra Pradesh government's
website openly revealed people's personal information. They did not want to do
it, but because the website was so unsafe, they had little choice. This material
was about a government medical shop and included information about people, phone
numbers, and medication specifics.
Nowadays, data privacy is a major problem. People are fond of and addicted to
the internet; we all desire more online transactions and trades. So why not? It
makes life easier and more enjoyable. But here is the point: every wonderful
thing has a dark side. Through the internet, we may be able to live a more
convenient existence, but at the expense of our privacy. Yes, your personal,
confidential information is not protected, and now is not the time to relax. It
is, undoubtedly, cause for alarm.
The MP Sharma vs Satish Chandra case (15 March 1954)
MP Sharma's case was connected to the examination of Dalmia group firms' records
in the aftermath of inquiries into Dalmia Jain Airways Ltd.ís company. The group
was founded in July 1946 and dissolved in June 1952. A probe showed business
malpractices, as well as shareholders, trying to conceal genuine information by
filing phony balance sheets. An FIR was filed on November 19, 1953, and the
district magistrate of Delhi received a request for search warrants.
The key issue was whether such methods infringed Articles 19 (1) (f) (property
right) and 20 (3) of the Constitution (right against self-incrimination). The
judges were to decide whether the government's ability to search and seizure was
limited by the constitution and if it violated the right to privacy in any
manner. Because the idea of privacy was still in its infancy, the bench avoided
getting into specifics. The notion expanded in breadth throughout the years that
The eight-judge panel, which included then-Chief Justice Mehar Chand Mahajan and
Justices B Jagannatha, BK Mukherjea, Natwarlal H Bhagwati, Ghulam Hasan, TL
Venkatarama Aiyar, Sudhi Ranjan Das, and Vivian Bose, stated in its decision
that "A search and seizure power is a supreme power of the state for the
protection of social security that must be regulated by law in any system of
There is no justification for importing a completely different fundamental right
into the Constitution through some process of strained construction when the
framers of the Constitution decided not to subject such regulation to
constitutional constraints by recognizing the fundamental right to privacy,
analogous to the American Fourth Amendment."
Kharak Singh vs State of Uttar Pradesh - 18 December 1962
In the case of Kharak Singh vs. Governmental of Uttar Pradesh, the question of
state monitoring was challenged in court as a breach of the right to privacy.
Kharak Singh, an accused in a dacoity case, was acquitted owing to a lack of
evidence and sued the police for violating his fundamental rights.
Domiciliary visits at night, hidden picketing of Singh's residence,
tracking/verifying his movement, and periodic officer inquiries were all
permissible under Uttar Pradesh police rules. Singh petitioned the Supreme
Court, citing violations of his basic rights. The subject of monitoring and the
validity of the Uttar Pradesh police rules was considered by a six-judge bench.
The major question was whether monitoring under Uttar Pradesh police rules
violated peopleís constitutionally granted fundamental rights. The police said
that the rules did not violate basic rights.
Even if they did, they functioned as acceptable limits in the interests of the
public and the effective performance of police duties. In an important ruling,
the court found that "privacy was not a guaranteed fundamental right." It did,
however, recognize the common law right to privacy and held that Article 21
(right to life) was the repository of residual personal rights. However, the
section enabling domiciliary visits was declared illegal. It stressed the
reciprocal exclusivity and self-contained nature of fundamental privacy rights.
How may it be dangerously abused? I would want to use Cambridge Analytica as an
illustration of how voting manipulation may be conducted using your data.
Cambridge Analytica exploited Facebook likes to distribute political party
propaganda. How many of us like one or more Facebook pages? Each of us has a
particular preference, such as whether you prefer comedy or Bollywood.
Your week point can be specified, such as humor, Bollywood, and so on. Your weak
point can be revealed based on your specific Facebook likes, such as if you like
comedy pages, you will be given comedy propaganda such as government blunders,
or if there is a comedy page, comedy halt south will be presented.
If you enjoy Bollywood, your favorite Bollywood stars will be paid to perform
some propaganda for it; however, not everyone will be shown; only select
individuals will be shown based on their preferences, whether comedy or
- Personal data should only be processed (collected, recorded, analyzed,
shown, etc.) for "clear, specific, and lawful" purposes. Only the
information required for such processing is to be gathered from anyone.
- Only necessary information will be gathered.
Many governments regard privacy to be a basic human right, and data protection
regulations exist to preserve that right. Data privacy is also vital because
individuals must believe that their data will be treated responsibly for them to
interact online. Data protection procedures are used by organizations to show
their clients and users that they can be trusted with their data.
As a result, we must exercise caution and safeguard our rights. On the internet,
we must distinguish between manipulators and honest suppliers. We need to
utilize services by providers like Home that do not trick us into giving away
our data but let us own our data and exercise our human rights.
Being a part of society usually takes precedence over the notion that we are,
primarily, individuals. Everyone needs their private place for whatever activity
they engage in (assuming here that it shall be legal). As a result, the state
guarantees everyone the right to spend private time with people they want away
from the prying eyes of the rest of the world. Privacy, according to Clinton
Rossiter, is the independence that can be interpreted as an endeavor to set up
autonomy in at least a few personal and spiritual matters.
The person's autonomy is the most unique thing he or she can have. There, he is
truly a free man. This is a right not against the state, but the entire world.
The individual does not wish to share his thoughts with the rest of the world,
and this right will protect his interests.
Even while the Supreme Court's judgment has supplied a much-needed boost to the
protection of our privacy, it is insufficient. All privacy rules are, at best,
hazy, making our personal information vulnerable anyplace. Until strict privacy
regulations are in place, our only alternative is to preserve our confidential
information in areas that we legally control, rather than on platforms where we
are continually asked to share our data with others.
Written By Srija Singh, A Second-Year Student At Amity Law School,