JUSTICE K S PUTTASWAMY V. UNION OF INDIA, 2017 SCC ONLINE SC 996
FACTS
Justice K.S. Puttaswamy filed a petition challenging the constitutional validity of the Aadhaar Project, managed by the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI).
Aadhaar was a 12-digit identification number linked to various welfare schemes to streamline service delivery and eliminate fake beneficiaries.
Other petitions challenging different aspects of Aadhaar were also referred to the Supreme Court.
The case questioned the government's collection of demographic biometric data and the right to privacy.
ISSUES
Whether the right to privacy was a fundamental right under the Constitution of India, 1950.
CONTENTIONS
Respondents relied on judgments in M.P. Sharma and Kharak Singh, arguing that the Constitution did not specifically protect the right to privacy.
Petitioners argued that the basis of these judgments was flawed and pointed to subsequent decisions upholding privacy rights.
Arguments also involved the scope of the right to privacy, with Petitioners advocating for a broad interpretation and Respondents advocating for a narrow approach.
COURT REASONING
Privacy was affirmed as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Privacy was interpreted expansively to cover the body and mind, including decisions, choices, information, and freedom.
A narrow view of personal liberty was rejected.
The Court established a standard of judicial review for state intrusion into privacy, including legality, need, proportionality, and procedural guarantees against abuse.
JUDGEMENT
The right to privacy was declared a distinct and independent fundamental right under Article 21.
The Court rejected the argument that privacy must be sacrificed for welfare entitlements provided by the state.
Privacy was not absolute but subject to restrictions meeting the three-fold requirement of legality, need, and proportionality.
Sexual orientation was recognized as an essential facet of privacy.
Informational privacy was deemed part of the right to privacy, with the Court urging Parliament to legislate on data protection.