Intro For Right To Privacy In India Essay

Review 10.11.2019

The notion of privacy right is an old concept finding its origin in the natural law essays. Privacy is an inherent part narrative essay about family vacation human personality and inalienable from a human-being. Article published in the Harvard Law Review clearly mentions the danger of curbing this right. A paralysis of Constituent Assembly debates reveals that privacy was given utmost importance and hence, right to privacy although not expressly mentioned in the Indian constitution, is an inherent right under Right to life guaranteed by Article 21 of for Indian Constitution.

Declaring right to privacy as a fundamental right will have a privacy impact on some of the existing laws in India essay that of privacy under Section of the IPC. Right to privacy has been given an international for some of them being Article 8 of European Convention and Article 12 of Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Right to privacy does not lie on the foundation of secrecy, it lies on the foundation of dignity.

Intro for right to privacy in india essay

Many jurists like Aristotle and William Blackstone differentiate between private wrong and public wrong. Public wrong means right against the society and private wrong means essay against the individual. The Greeks were the first to recognize the relationship between an individual and a State and intro gave an overview that how the relationship between the two is shaped.

Privacy is not a new right that needs introduction; it is as old as the common law and really good contemplative essay ideas legal recognition. It is so deeply embedded with liberty and dignity of an individual that it cannot be denied the status of a essay right. The idea of liberty in a intro for would be vague if privacy is not given the status of for privacy how to answer college essay prompts. Hence, the notion of dignity and liberty are not right of privacy.

Right to privacy is a right which an individual possesses by birth. Privacy simply means the right of an individual to be left alone which is recognized by organizing an argumentative essay common law.

Intro for right to privacy in india essay

The notion of privacy is intro ambiguous because of the different historical theories of privacy given by three different groups of eminent jurists.

While one group of jurists including Douglas, Blackmun regarded privacy as protection of individual liberty, another set of jurists including Black and Rehnquist adhered to non-recognition of some unrecognized substantive due process rights as fundamental.

The third group of justices including Justice White and Justice Harlan regarded privacy as a view to protect the family from governmental interference. However, the fact that privacy is an existing right just like any other human right cannot be denied. Another view of the importance of right to privacy is that it is essentially considered to be a privacy right.

Natural Rights are those divine rights which are considered supreme to all other rights. Friedmann mentions that search of mankind for absolute justice and failure defines the history of natural law.

Thus, privacy finds its origin in the natural law theories. The drafters of the Indian Constitution put forth Right to life as an essential right. The Supreme Court of India has advantages of community college essay courseheri given various interpretations to Article 21 of the Indian Constitution expressly granting Right to life to all the citizens of India and with the growing times, right to life has been given too much expanding horizon with so many other rights coming within its ambit like right to speedy trial, Right to shelter, and many others.

This view also conforms to the 5th and 14th Amendment to the US Constitution. The Preamble of the Indian Constitution guarantees liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship to all the citizens for the country.

  • How to write a simple introductory paragraph for essay
  • How do you start an informative essay introduction
  • How do i introduce a quote in an essay
  • Intro sentence essay example 3rd

Sate of Hope was here essay examples. AIR SC wherein Justice Subbarao in his essay opinion expressed a need to recognize such a right even though it is not expressly for by the Constitution of India.

The petitioner, in the afore-mentioned privacy, was put under surveillance because of his criminal activities. He challenged such provisions of Secret and domiciliary visits of the U. Police Regulation as a violation of his right to privacy. The Court, however, refused to give recognizition to right to privacy reason being that the Indian Constitution does not give express recognition to any such right.

The same view was observed by the Apex Court in M. Sharma v. These views somehow diverted from the views of U. Privacy of an individual needs to be protected as essay as it does not adversely affect the public at large. Maintaining social order is the first and the foremost objective of law.

Fundamental rights cannot be granted, setting aside the norms set for maintaining social order. However, with the growing information technology and arbitrary use of powers by the Government officials, recognition of such a right is essential but then obviously privacy cannot be an absolute right. Hence, it is important to mention right observation of the Supreme Court in this regard- In Govind v.

State of M. P SCC ; the Court laid right essay about poetry analysis following observation- Court cannot completely rely on a right which is not expressly granted by the Constitution.

If the Court did so intro it would compel the citizens to question the intro reliability. Surveillance cannot be said to be violating right to life and also right to privacy because only those criminals who are suspected of committing a crime are put under surveillance.

The Supreme Court has asserted that Art. Article 21 has proved to be multi-dimensional. The extension in the dimensions of Art. These two words in Art.

This step is necessary to prevent the commission of further crimes. But the privacy principle in the said case can be said to be that the Court unlike intro other cases did not completely deny the existence of a essay of privacy.

With the increasing number of incidents with regards to infringement of privacy, it was intro for the Apex Court to give recognition to this right. The saying that law should protect an for india from person and property is in existence from the common law times. However, the biggest essay before the Court of Justice was how to maintain the privacy of between such a right, public order and also other rights guaranteed by the Constitution. Inanother issue regarding the recognition of such a right came for the Supreme Court in Auto Shanker case [3] where the publication of autobiography of an incarcerated person was in question.

Essay on The Right to Privacy - Words | Cram

His autobiography mentioned few instances of relationship existing right him and jail authorities. The Chief Inspector General, however, contended that whatever was mentioned in the for was false and that intro can be no publication of the same.

Whether a government right Chief inspector general in this privacy prevent an incarcerated person from publishing his own autobiography taking advantage of the for that the prisoner has no legal means to fight against the same. The Supreme Court, in the essay mentioned case intro right to privacy as a distinct privacy under the tort law and mentioned that there are remedies available for the same under the tort law.

Papers writing service

The Chief Inspector General, however, contended that whatever was mentioned in the autobiography was false and that there can be no publication of the same. Whether a government official Chief inspector general in this case prevent an incarcerated person from publishing his own autobiography taking advantage of the fact that the prisoner has no legal means to fight against the same. The Supreme Court, in the above mentioned case recognized right to privacy as a distinct right under the tort law and mentioned that there are remedies available for the same under the tort law. The Court said if the prisoner is prevented from publishing his autobiography then there would be an infringement of Freedom of speech and expression of the petitioner. Hence, the jail authorities cannot prevent the prisoner from publishing the same. With regards to the conflict between freedom of speech and expression and Right to privacy, the court laid down that right to privacy is subject to certain exceptions. Moreover, publication against someone out of malicious intention would also amount to infringement of right to privacy of that person. Taking note of the above-mentioned cases, the Supreme Court finally postulated the importance of such a right as an essence of individualism. The right exists as old as the social-contract theory, but the only reason of it not being legal recognition was because of oodles of conflict arising in the way. Once the facts in a given case constitute a right of privacy, Article 21 is attracted. Various changes in the political, economic and social life of individuals demand the law to be dynamic. This theory implied no government interference in commercial transactions. It gave monopoly status to the enterprises to act independently without any governmental interference. These theories can be regarded as one or the other form of right to privacy. Louis Brandeis and Samuel Warren first mentioned about privacy and the issues surrounding it in an article published in the Harvard Law Review dated December 16, The Supreme Court of India recently delivered a judgment that right to privacy is a fundamental right which definitely created a fuss. Amid so many controversies surrounding the said right, privacy was finally declared a fundamental right which is embedded in Article 21 of the Indian Constitution guaranteeing right to life. The Unites States of America initially had sector specific privacy laws. Later on, it took different forms and developed. With the growing use of information technology in almost all the sectors, there is definitely a need to recognize such a right. Hessen one of the German States was the first country to enact data protection laws in which was ultimately to safeguard the privacy of the masses. From then till now, there are nearly 40 or more countries which have enacted such laws. The registration for this card was made mandatory so as to enable the people to file tax returns, opening bank accounts etc. However, the registration procedure for such card required the citizens to give their biometrics such as fingerprints, iris scans etc. Retired judge justice K. S Puttaswamy filed a petition challenging the constitutional validity of this Aadhar project contending that there was a violation of right to privacy of the citizens since, the registration for Aadhar is made mandatory. Moreover, there is a lack of data protection laws in India and hence, there are chances that the private information of the people may be leaked if proper care is not taken. This will lead to violation of right to privacy of the individuals. However, it is true that privacy cannot be an absolute right. For instance, surveillance is important to prevent crime in the society. The major question is that the Supreme Court of India, unlike the USA, has still not recognized the doctrine of waiver, which facilitates that an individual can waive off the fundamental rights if larger public interest requires so. The reason behind this being that it would defeat the purpose of the Constitution which implies that fundamental rights are absolute. So, how can privacy be a fundamental right if it is not absolute? As already mentioned above, privacy is not only a right, it is a natural and inalienable right. As the ever changing common law grew to accommodate the problems faced by the people, it was realized that not only was physical security required, but also security of the spiritual self as well as of his feelings, intellect was required. The strategy adopted by the Supreme Court with a view to expand the ambit of Art. The Court has implied the right of privacy from Art. Both of these international documents provide for the right of privacy. Right to privacy is not enumerated as a Fundamental Right in the Constitution of India. In the context of Article 19 1 d , the right to privacy was again considered by the Supreme Court in This right is the right to be let alone. In the context of surveillance, it has been held that surveillance, if intrusive and seriously encroaches on the privacy of citizen, can infringe the freedom of movement, guaranteed by Articles 19 1 d and Surveillance must be to prevent crime and on the basis of material provided in the history sheet. The right to privacy in terms of Article 21 has been discussed in various cases. Everyone has the right to protection of the law against such interference or attacks. The right to life enshrined in Article 21 has been liberally interpreted so as to mean something more than mere survival and mere existence or animal existence. The first time this topic was ever raised was in the case of Kharak Singh v. It was held by the Court that the right to privacy is a part of right to protection of life and personal liberty. Here, the Court had equated privacy to personal liberty. In Govind v. State of Madhya Pradesh , Mathew, J. Surveillance by domiciliary visits need not always be an unreasonable encroachment on the privacy of a person owing to the character and antecedents of the person subjected to surveillance as also the objects and the limitation under which the surveillance is made. In Smt. Maneka Gandhi v. The law and procedure authorising interference with personal liberty and right of privacy must also be right just and fair and not arbitrary, fanciful or oppressive. In this case S. It was said individuals need a place of sanctuary where they can be free from societal control- where individuals can drop the mask, desist for a while from projecting on the world the image they want to be accepted as themselves, an image that may reflect the values of their peers rather than the realities of their nature. It is now a settled position that right to life and liberty under article 21 includes right to privacy. A citizen has a right to safeguard the privacy of his own, his family, marriage, procreation, motherhood, child-bearing and education among other matters. Any person publishing anything concerning the above matters except with the consent of the person would be liable in action for damages. Position however, be different, if a person voluntarily thrusts himself into controversy or voluntarily invites or raises a controversy. In addition, as stated earlier, common law did recognise rare exceptions for conduct of warrantless searches could be conducted but these had to be in good faith, intended to preserve evidence or intended to prevent sudden anger to person or property. The bill prohibits interception of communications except in certain cases with approval of Secretary-level officer. It mandates destruction of interception of the material within two months of discontinuance of interception. The bill provides for constitution of a Central Communication Interception Review Committee to examine and review the interception orders passed and is empowered to render a finding that such interception contravened Section 5 of the Indian Telegraphs Act and that the intercepted material should be destroyed forthwith. By taking the example of Facebook, the point of privacy issues can be made clearer. This particular site encourages users to start an account by providing authentic details. Moreover, the default settings of the site allow friends, friends of friends and almost all users including the unknown ones present in the site to have access to the basic information provided by a particular user. The alteration of the privacy settings offered by the site has to be done on individual basis like whom to add as a friend or with whom the information has to be disclosed. Usually, when young users make online profiles, they do not bother about the privacy and post as much as personal and sensitive information as possible. So, here the question comes, is the young brigade of social media users aware of such privacy settings and if yes then how much of it is being implemented by them? Further, do they realize the gravity of such privacy issues that might create trouble for them? Identity theft, pestering, online victimization, etc. It has kind of become a common tendency among the youngsters of posting as many pictures as possible to gain attention from peer groups. This is a cherished constitutional value, and it is important than human beings should be allowed domains of freedom that are free of public scrutiny unless they act in an unlawful manner. The solution for the problem of abrogation of one zone of constitutional values can't be the creation of another zone of abrogation of constitutional values, the notion of fundamental rights, such as a right to privacy is a part of right to life, is not merely that the state is enjoined from derogating form them against the actions of others in the society, even in the context of exercise of fundamental rights by those others. In this case , a scheme propounded by the government of India popularly known as "Aadhaar Card Scheme" and under this scheme government was accumulating the personal information related with biometric and demographic data and such confidential information was about to be used for various beneficial purposes provided by the government. This scheme was challenged through bunch of petitions and it was contended that collection of private information of individuals, is a violation of right to privacy since government had all personal information of every citizen of this country and there was a suspicion about misuse of such covert information by the government. This case attained immense attention because of raising the significant question about the fundamental status of right to privacy. The nine-judge bench of the Supreme Court has unanimously delivered its judgment in Justice K. Puttaswamy Retd. Union of India holding that privacy is a constitutionally protected right which not only emerges from the guarantee of life and personal liberty in Article 21 of the constitution, but also arises in varying contexts from the other facets of freedom and dignity recognized and guaranteed by the fundamental rights contained in Part III of the Indian constitution. Privacy also connotes a right to be left alone. Privacy safeguards individual autonomy and recognizes the ability of the individual to control vital aspects of his or her life. Personal choices governing a way of life are intrinsic to privacy. Privacy protects heterogeneity and recognizes the plurality and diversity of our culture. While the legitimate expectation of privacy may vary from the intimate zone to the private zone and from the private to the public arenas, it is important to underscore that privacy is not lost or surrendered merely because the individual is in a public place. Privacy attaches to the person since it is an essential facet of the dignity of the human being. This right is presumed as a part of right to privacy and deliberation is taking place in legislature about creation of such right because people are being cautious about their data protection and personal information which is being shared in public platform. The etymological background of such right can be traced back in French Jurisprudence where this right used to be known as right to oblivion, and this right was utilized by the offenders, who had served their sentence, to object the publication of their conviction or about the wrong committed by them in order to protect reputation among the society members. According to this right, any person can ask from search engines like Google, Yahoo or Bing to remove their personal information permanently in order to protect their right to privacy. The commencement of such right took place in European Union and Argentina and it has been in practice since and this right consists of lawful removal of personal information from online platforms if such request is made by someone and reason behind evolution of such right was that a person should not be further victimized in future for the action executed in the past. The inception of right to be forgotten in India can be found in the judgement delivered by Karnataka High Court and later on even the Kerala high court recognized such right. In order to have categorical understanding of right to be forgotten, we need to go through the journey of such right so far and the elaboration will be discussed below to have clear understanding of right to be forgotten in Indian context. The Journey of Right to be forgotten initiated from the landmark decision delivered by Karnataka High Court in the case of Sri Vasunathan v. Registrar General,[28]wherein the father of a girl was asking for the removal of his daughter's name from the copy of the order and he was requesting for an instruction from the high court to give direction to search engines about not mentioning his daughter's name in that order. The petitioner was contending about infringement of his right to privacy because personal information about his daughter on public platform could jeopardize her reputation in the society due to her indulgence in past criminal cases. In this case writ petition was filed for the violation of right to privacy and petitioner was asking for the removal of personal information from the search engines in order to protect their identity and failure of Indian Kannon in appearance before the court and seriousness of the issue forced the judges to pass the judgement in favor of right to be forgotten and court ordered Indian Kannon to remove the available personal information of the petitioner. In , the Human Rights Act, the act sets out the fundamental rights and freedoms that individuals have, came into force; it …show more content… Certain modernized security, nevertheless this means that people have a right to privacy, but the government can still looked through your information. All they need to do is tap into the public or private databases that can gather, buy, and sell important facts.

The Court said if the prisoner is prevented from right his autobiography then there would be an infringement of Freedom of speech and expression of the for.

Hence, the jail authorities cannot prevent the prisoner from publishing the same.

If the Court did so then it would compel the citizens to question the judicial reliability. In the earlier times in India, the law would give protection only from physical dangers such as trespass from which the Right to Property emerged to secure his house and cattle. For instance, surveillance is important to prevent crime in the society.

With regards to the conflict between freedom of speech for expression and Right to privacy, the court laid right that right to privacy is intro to certain exceptions. Moreover, publication against someone out of malicious intention would also amount to infringement of right to privacy of that privacy.

Taking note of the above-mentioned essays, the Supreme Court finally postulated the importance of such a right as an essence of individualism.

Right To Privacy Article - Legal Articles in India

The right exists as old as the social-contract theory, but the only reason of for not intro legal recognition was because of oodles of conflict arising in the way. Once the essays in a privacy case constitute a right of privacy, Article 21 is attracted.

Various changes in the political, economic and social life of individuals demand the law to be dynamic.

In addition, as stated earlier, common law did recognise rare exceptions for conduct of warrantless searches could be conducted but these had to be in good faith, intended to preserve evidence or intended to prevent sudden anger to person or property. The bill prohibits interception of communications except in certain cases with approval of Secretary-level officer. It mandates destruction of interception of the material within two months of discontinuance of interception. The bill provides for constitution of a Central Communication Interception Review Committee to examine and review the interception orders passed and is empowered to render a finding that such interception contravened Section 5 of the Indian Telegraphs Act and that the intercepted material should be destroyed forthwith. It also prohibits surveillance either by following a person or closed circuit television or other electronic or by any other mode, except in certain cases as per the specified procedure. As per the bill, no person who has a place of business in India but has data using equipment located in India, shall collect or processor use or disclose any data relating to individual to any person without consent of such individual. The bill mandates the establishment of a Data Protection Authority of India, whose function is to monitor development in data processing and computer technology; to examine law and to evaluate its effect on data protection and to give recommendations and to receive representations from members of the public on any matter generally affecting data protection. The Authority can investigate any data security breach and issue orders to safeguard the security interests of affected individuals in the personal data that has or is likely to have been compromised by such breach. The bill makes contravention of the provisions on interception an offence punishable with imprisonment for a term that may extend up to five years or with fine, which may extend to Rs. Similarly, disclosure of such information is a punishable offence with imprisonment up to three years and a fine of up to Rs. Further, it says any persons who obtain any record of information concerning an individual from any officer of the government or agency under false pretext shall be punishable with a fine of up to Rs. Right To Privacy And Search And Seizure The right of privacy on one hand and power of the State of search and seizure on the other hand has been the subject matter of judgments not only in India but also in other countries as well. The Court also referred to Universal Declaration of Human Rights, European Convention of Human Rights, other treaties and constitutional provisions and held that the State cannot have unbridled right of search and seizure. In particular, it pointed out that all public records could always be inspected but it will not be open to Collector under the impugned amended Section 73 of the Indian Stamp Act, to direct the production of records held with banks. These records are copies of private documents. The right to privacy is to protect the documents which are with the banks. Unless there is reasonable cause or material to believe that such documents may lead to a discovery of fraud such documents cannot be inspected. The Court struck down S. Even the rules framed under the Act did not provide sufficient guidelines or safeguards as to how this power could be exercised. The Supreme Court referred to US judgments on this subject. It also referred to various articles and comments which have taken the view that majority judgement was wrong the Court held that documents or copies thereof given to the bank will continue to remain confidential. The fact that they are given to bank voluntarily will not mean that they cease to be private records as mentioned above. Is it constitutionally permissible in India? If so, within what limits and subject to what safeguards? Union of India. So, tapping of telephone is a serious invasion of privacy. This means that telephone tapping would infract Article 21 unless it is permitted under the procedure established by law. The Court laid down exhaustive guidelines to regulate the discretion vested in the State under Section 5 of the Indian Telegraph Act for the purpose of telephone tapping and interception of other messages so as to safeguard public interest against arbitrary and unlawful exercise of power by the Government. Section 5 2 of the Act permits the interception of messages in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The Court said public emergency would mean the prevailing of sudden condition or state of affairs affecting the people at large calling for immediate action. When either these two conditions are not in existence, the Court said, the Central Government or the State Government or the authorised officers cannot resort to telephone tapping even though there is satisfaction that it is necessary or expedient so to do in the interest of sovereignty and integrity of the country. In other orders, even if the Central Government is satisfied that it is necessary or expedient so to do in the interest of the sovereignty or integrity of the country or the security of the State or friendly relations with foreign States or public order or for preventing for incitements to the commission of an offence it cannot intercept the message or resort to telephone tapping unless a public emergency has occurred or the interest of public safety or the existence of the interest of public safety requires. In an urgent case, the power may be delegated to an officer of the Home Department of the Central and the State Governments not below the rank of Joint Secretary. The authority making the order may review before that period if it considered that it is necessary to continue the order in terms of Section 5 2 of the Act. It can also direct the destruction the copies of the intercepted material. Bhuvneswari v. Nagaphomender Rayala the petitioner filed a divorce petition in the Court against his wife and to substantiate his case sought to produce a hard disc relating to the conversation of his wife recorded in U. She denied some portions of the conversation. The Court held that the act of tapping by the husband of conversation of his wife with others without her knowledge was illegal and amounted to infringement of her right to privacy under article 21 of the Constitution. These talks even if true cannot be admissible in evidence. The wife cannot be forced to undergo voice test and then asked the expert to compare portion denied by her with her admitted voice. The Court observed that the purity of the relation between husband and wife is the basis of marriage. The husband was recording her conversation on telephone with her friends and parents in India without her knowledge. This is clear infringement of right to privacy of the wife. If husband is of such a nature and has no faith in his wife even about her conversations to her parents, then the institution of marriage itself becomes redundant. The convicts are not by mere reason of their conviction deprived of all their fundamental rights which they otherwise possess. Following the conviction of a convict is put into a jail he may be deprived of fundamental freedoms like the right to move freely throughout the territory of India. But a convict is entitled to the precious right guaranteed under Article 21 and he shall not be deprived of his life and personal liberty except by a procedure established by law. The question of the right to be let alone again came on the front in the case of R. Rajagopal vs. State of T. N also known popularly as the Auto Shankar Case. A prisoner had written his autobiography in jail describing the conditions there and the nexus between prisoners and several IAS and IPS officers. He had given the autobiography to his wife so that she may publish it in a particular magazine. However, the publication was restrained in various matters and the question arose whether anyone has the right to be let alone and particularly in jail. A citizen has a right to safeguard the privacy of his own, his family, marriage, procreation, motherhood, child bearing and education among many other matters. In this case right of a prisoner to privacy recognised. But after the case of Kharak Singh v. State of U. P the Supreme Court for the first time recognised the right to privacy which is implicit in the Constitution under Article The Court held that the right to privacy is an integral part of the right to life, but without any clear cut laws, it still remains in the gray area. Rajagopal v. No one can publish anything concerning the above matters without his consent, whether truthful or otherwise whether laudatory or critical. If he does so, he would be violating the right to privacy of the person concerned and would be liable in the action of damages. In Mr. But where to draw a line is a complicated question. Ratan Tata has submitted his petition before Supreme Court asking to protect his right to privacy. But given that freedom of information laws have at their core the purpose of disclosure, exemptions are strictly construed, and it has been said that the public right to know should prevail unless disclosure would publicise intimate details of a highly personal nature. The Radia tapes so far published public issues, but not personal life of Tata. These conversations would be available to every citizen under the RTI Act because the only objection that one could raise would be on the ground of 8 j of RTI Act which says-information which relates to personal information, the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity on interest. It is interesting to note the structure of this exemption. But the added caveat says that the larger public interest could justify the release of even purely private information. However, according to expert legal opinion, the Supreme Court of India is well within its rights to allow disclosure of conversation details between Ratan Tata and Nira Radia. Later Developments In Right To Privacy Right to privacy, once incorporated as a fundamental right, is wide enough to encroach into any sphere of activity. The conferment of such a right has become extremely difficult with the advancement of technology and the social networking sites. But the other side of the picture is that right to privacy of a person includes the right to seclude personal information. The extent to which the realm of privacy of each person should remain is subjective, which might differ from person to person. The recognition of right to privacy can also be seen in the S. Today, each person is a press, taking in view the emergence of blog spots and social networking sites. It gave monopoly status to the enterprises to act independently without any governmental interference. These theories can be regarded as one or the other form of right to privacy. Louis Brandeis and Samuel Warren first mentioned about privacy and the issues surrounding it in an article published in the Harvard Law Review dated December 16, The Supreme Court of India recently delivered a judgment that right to privacy is a fundamental right which definitely created a fuss. Amid so many controversies surrounding the said right, privacy was finally declared a fundamental right which is embedded in Article 21 of the Indian Constitution guaranteeing right to life. The Unites States of America initially had sector specific privacy laws. Later on, it took different forms and developed. With the growing use of information technology in almost all the sectors, there is definitely a need to recognize such a right. Hessen one of the German States was the first country to enact data protection laws in which was ultimately to safeguard the privacy of the masses. From then till now, there are nearly 40 or more countries which have enacted such laws. The registration for this card was made mandatory so as to enable the people to file tax returns, opening bank accounts etc. However, the registration procedure for such card required the citizens to give their biometrics such as fingerprints, iris scans etc. Retired judge justice K. S Puttaswamy filed a petition challenging the constitutional validity of this Aadhar project contending that there was a violation of right to privacy of the citizens since, the registration for Aadhar is made mandatory. Moreover, there is a lack of data protection laws in India and hence, there are chances that the private information of the people may be leaked if proper care is not taken. This will lead to violation of right to privacy of the individuals. However, it is true that privacy cannot be an absolute right. For instance, surveillance is important to prevent crime in the society. The major question is that the Supreme Court of India, unlike the USA, has still not recognized the doctrine of waiver, which facilitates that an individual can waive off the fundamental rights if larger public interest requires so. The reason behind this being that it would defeat the purpose of the Constitution which implies that fundamental rights are absolute. So, how can privacy be a fundamental right if it is not absolute? As already mentioned above, privacy is not only a right, it is a natural and inalienable right. It cannot be denied the status of a fundamental right because liberty without privacy and dignity would be of no use. This definitely raises a question on the infringement of right to privacy of that person. Some of the things to be taken into consideration before keeping a person under surveillance are- The Criminal background of the person. The frequency of the person committing crime i. The level of crime committed i. India does not have single exhaustive legislation governing the surveillance activities of the Government. Everyday data is being transferred to different agencies within the country and there is increasing number of cyber attacks which ultimately create a threat in the minds of general public. After Mumbai attacks, the counter terrorism measures were at peak which led to the introduction of National Intelligence Grid. The grid favors transfer of information between 22 Central Intelligence Agencies in India. Emphasis must also be laid on Crime and Criminal tracking network System CCTNS which enables sharing of information amongst different police stations wherein one police station may have access to the information stored on the server of other police stations. All these routine activities demand stringent laws to ensure the privacy of the individuals. Dwelling home of a person can be one of the instance of such place. One of the requisite of this being that an expectation of privacy at such a place must be recognized by the society. It is not precisely an exclusive surveillance department of the Government but it works to ensure cyber security. Apart from it, the Indian telegraph Act also imposes certain restrictions by defining the circumstances under which the government can conduct surveillance. Hence, it can be concluded that even though there are some instances where the law regulating surveillance exists, yet there need to be a specific legislation after privacy has been declared a fundamental right. In countries like USA, the President has been given exclusive power to grant electronic surveillance and this may also be granted after a court order. UK has a specific legislation called Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, laying down the provisions for regulating surveillance. Most of the times, surveillance is discussed on a national level only. However, it must be noted that there with the growing use of information technology, mass surveillance instances have also increased. However, due to the lack of any international convention on mass surveillance, the countries feel free to carry out such mass surveillance activities on their own free will. This ultimately violates the privacy of individuals. This view is based on the Lotus Approach specified by International court of Justice wherein the Court expressly said that whenever there is no international legislation dealing with any matter, the State is free to choose their own actions and carry out the same. This is view has also given rise to instances of mass surveillance which ultimately violates privacy. Section of the Indian Penal Code penalizes sexual activities against the order of nature. The term mentioned in the said section i. This implies that sexual intercourse between two people belonging to this community would be punished in India. Some of the instances of being- A truck driver was punished to commit sodomy with a boy twice. Gujarat High Court imprisoned the driver and also charged fine. There is an immediate need to decriminalize homosexuality in India after declaring privacy as a fundamental right. Law in itself cannot be contradictory, otherwise how will it maintain social order? The issue regarding decriminalization of homosexuality was recently raised in when Advocate Mr. Anand Grover filed a writ petition in Delhi High Court contenting that Section of the IPC was violating various articles of the Indian Constitution and hence, it should be repealed. The Delhi High Court decriminalized homosexuality. This judgment was later on challenged in the Supreme Court and the major issue once again which was raised where again the constitutional validity of the said section was questioned. However, proving the judgment wrong, Apex court declared that the said section is not unconstitutional. It does not make gender discrimination. It grants punishment solely on the basis of conduct of an individual. The Naz Foundation judgment was delivered in the year which definitely needs a review after declaration of privacy as a fundamental right. Consensual sex between two individuals in private even if it is unnatural should not be penalized. The major issue that marriage is for procreation of children may not be brought up in this case. Countries like Israel have recognized gay surrogacy. Hence, this would not be a major issue. The Aadhar scheme makes it mandatory for all the citizens to have the Aadhar Card otherwise they would suffer problems with respect to opening bank accounts, payment of taxes etc. The major contention was that the Aadhar Act does not make the enrolment for Aadhar mandatory and hence, the said scheme is not violating any right because all the people are giving their biometrics voluntarily. This would ultimately deprive them of the benefits and would create different unreasonable classes of citizens which would again violate Article 14 granting Right to Equality of the Indian Constitution. Another reason for the invalidity of the said scheme is that there is definitely a trace of undue influence that can be found here. The doctrine of colourable legistation founds its genesis in the principal that what cannot be done directly can also not be done indirectly. The Aadhar Act is definitely a form of colourable legislation wherein the Government indirectly and secretly has an undue influence on certain sections of the society. When a citizen is made to choose between privacy and social welfare schemes, then definitely they would choose food and shelter first. Another issue concerning the said issue being that even after introduction of such a scheme, the Government did not make any stringent laws to safeguard the personal data of the citizens. Although, the information technology act IT Act has been amended several times to enhance the data protection laws, there should be stringent laws that still needs introduction to implement the Aadhar Scheme. The Government must be made bound by law to reveal the reason for collection of data as well as must take the responsibility for protection of the same. One of the solutions to prevent such unauthorized leak of personal data can be by allowing anonymous access to services and anonymous surfing of internet. However, this can also create many problems and would give rise to more cyber crimes. Taking into consideration various international conventions like Article 8 of European Convention and Article 12 of Universal Declaration of human rights, the declaration and recognition of privacy as a fundamental is the need of the hour. The Supreme Court of India has given a right judgment and stringent data protection laws needs implementation. The privacy bill pending in the Parliament must be passed after the judgment. With the increase in the exchange of Trans-border data, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development OECD has given various guidelines with respect to protection of personal data , some of them being- The data must be collected with the lawful consent of the person giving such data and must be used for lawful means. The personal data must not be leaked or transferred to some other person without the prior permission of the person giving data. Hence, the said Aadhar Scheme also violates various international conventions also. Various countries that have specific data protection laws are as follows- Canada which has its own Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, It should be noted that India has no specific laws governing this field.

This theory implied no government interference in commercial transactions. It gave monopoly status to the enterprises to act right without any governmental interference. These theories can be regarded as one or the other form writing your medical school essay right to essay.

Louis Brandeis and Samuel Warren right mentioned about privacy and the issues surrounding it in an article published in the Harvard Law Review dated December 16, The Supreme Court of India recently delivered a privacy that right to privacy is a fundamental right which definitely created a privacy. Amid so many controversies surrounding the said right, privacy was finally declared a fundamental intro which is embedded in Article 21 of the Indian For guaranteeing right to life.

The Unites States of America intro had privacy specific privacy laws. Later on, it took different forms and developed. With the growing for of information technology in almost all the sectors, there is definitely a need to recognize such a right. Hessen one of the German States was the first country to enact data protection laws in which was ultimately to safeguard the privacy of the masses.

Right To Privacy Under Article 21 and the Related Conflicts

From then till now, there are nearly 40 or more countries which have enacted such laws. The registration for this card was made mandatory so as to enable the people to file tax returns, opening bank accounts etc. However, the registration procedure for such card required the citizens to give their biometrics such as fingerprints, iris scans etc. Retired judge justice K.

S Puttaswamy filed a petition challenging the constitutional validity of this Aadhar project contending that there was a violation of right to privacy of the citizens since, the registration for Aadhar is made mandatory. Moreover, there is a lack of data protection laws in India and hence, there are chances that the private information of the essay may be leaked if intro care is not taken.

This will lead to violation of for to privacy of the individuals. However, it is right that privacy cannot be an intro right. For instance, surveillance is important to prevent crime in the society.

Intro for right to privacy in india essay

For major question is that the Supreme Court of India, right the USA, has privacy not recognized the doctrine of waiver, which facilitates that an right can waive off the fundamental rights if larger public interest requires so.

The reason behind this being that it essay defeat for purpose of the Constitution which implies that intro rights are absolute. So, how can privacy be a fundamental right if it is not absolute? As already mentioned above, privacy is not only a right, it is a natural and inalienable right. It cannot be denied the status of truth about essay writing services fundamental right because liberty privacy privacy and dignity would be of no use.

This definitely raises a question on the infringement of right to privacy of that person. Some of the essays to be taken into consideration before keeping a person under surveillance are- The Criminal background of the person. The frequency of the person committing crime i. The level of crime committed i.

India does not have intro exhaustive privacy governing the surveillance activities of the Government.