English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Government hails SC verdict on Right to Privacy; underscores the point that it is not an absolute right

Published

9 years ago

on

Government hails SC verdict on Right to Privacy; underscores the point that it is not an absolute right

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]~By Rajesh Sinha

Smarting under the blow from Supreme Court’s verdict declaring Right to Privacy as a Fundamental Right, which it had hotly contested, the Centre’s reaction still focused on the aspect of “no right is absolute”.

Quoting from the judgment, a press release from the Ministry of Law and Justice said: “The Government is of the clear opinion that its legislations are compliant with the tests laid down in the judgement. The Supreme court has stated that “…requires a careful and sensitive balance between individual interests and legitimate concerns of the State. The legitimate aims of the State would include for instance protecting national security, preventing and investigating crime, encouraging innovation and the spread of knowledge, and preventing the dissipation of social welfare benefits.”

The government said it is committed to this object – and there lies the nub. This interpretation leaves the door open to encroachment on the right for questionable goals.

Critics say the Aadhaar ID cards link enough data to create a comprehensive profile of a person’s spending habits, their friends and acquaintances, the property they own and a trove of other information.

Aadhaar was originally meant to be a secure form of digital identification for citizens. But as it was rolled out, concerns arose about privacy, data security and recourse for citizens in the face of data leaks and other issues. Over time, Aadhaar was made mandatory for income tax returns and operating bank accounts. Companies also started pushing to gain access to Aadhaar details of customers. Opponents say that its use for what are effectively essential services means their right to privacy is increasingly being violated.

There were other concerns as well. First, making Aadhar mandatory for delivering services and ‘preventing dissipation of social service benefits’ is an intrusion into privacy for administrative convenience or to cover administrative inefficiency. If the government machinery is inefficient, should it encroach on Fundamental Rights? The court does say “preventing the dissipation of social welfare benefits” is a “legitimate aim of the State” to restrict the right.

Second, it is doubtful if making Aadhaar mandatory would enhance security. There have been instances of terrorists being found with Aadhaar cards. No instances have been reported of an Aadhaar card leading to a terrorist. On the other hand, making Aadhaar mandatory for various services, bank accounts, mobile phones etc makes it possible for any agency to access all kinds of information about an individual it wants to target and harass. Any individual whom an agency wants to target would be vulnerable to harassment. Even a notice seeking explanation is a harassment for the ordinary citizen, even if it does not involve any crime or offence and does not lead to prosecution or penalty.

The government appeared keen to retain its powers in this regard. Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad read from the judgments of the different judges on the Supreme Court bench to underscore that they acknowledged privacy “is not an absolute right, it must be subject to some reasonable restrictions.”

Contrary to what the government had argued in the court, he said the government’s view is consistent that right to privacy should be fundamental. He said the “essence of today’s judgment” validated what Arun Jaitley, then Law Minister, had told Parliament in 2016. “Much before the creation of the nine-judge bench, the government, while moving the Aadhaar Act had clearly acknowledged that Right to Privacy is fundamental, flowing from Article 21,” the minister said.

Prasad added that it is “unknown in civilised existence that a government was seeking to collect data of its countrymen without the authority of law”.

On the benefits of Aadhaar, Shankar claimed the government has saved Rs 57,000 crore through validation. “Aadhar validates information for 3 crore people every day. The world is marvelling at this technology. It is completely homegrown. Should be proud,” he said.

In its press statement, Union Ministry of Law and Justice said: “The Government welcomes the view of the Supreme Court, which is consistent with all the necessary safeguards that the Government has been ensuring in its legislative proposals which had been approved by Parliament.”

The Modi government statement was more of a political comment as it sought to attack the previous government: “The issue of personal liberty had a chequered history during the previous Congress Governments. Immediately after the Constitution was framed, the Congress Government at the Centre had consistently maintained that personal liberty could be denied to an individual by any legislation irrespective of the reasonableness of that legislation. The Congress Governments had consistently argued that privacy was not a part of any constitutional guarantees. In fact, during the internal emergency when Article 21 was suspended, the Central Government had argued before the Supreme Court that a person could be killed and deprived even his life (let alone liberty) and he would still be remediless.”

“The UPA Government had introduced AADHAR scheme without any legislative support. It was in that context that the question of the UPA’s AADHAR scheme was challenged before the judiciary. The NDA Government ensured that necessary legislation was approved by Parliament. Adequate safeguards were also introduced.”

“… the UPA Government created an AADHAR without any legislative support. The present Government did exactly the opposite. It gave a legislative support to AADHAR and incorporated in law special safeguards with regard to privacy. It has also assured the Supreme Court that it will soon be coming out with a data protection law for which a committee headed by Justice Sri Krishna, a retired judge of the Supreme Court, had already been appointed.”

The government reiterated, “The judgement reads that personal liberty is not an absolute right but liable to the restrictions provided in the Constitution which will be examined on a case to case basis.”[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

India News

BJP’s Punjab outreach faces fresh challenge as farmers return to Shambhu border

The BJP’s push to shift Punjab’s political focus towards development has encountered a fresh challenge as farmers resume protests at the Shambhu border over concerns surrounding the proposed India-US trade agreement.

Published

12 hours ago

on

July 27, 2026

By

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s recent visit to Punjab had signalled what many viewed as a fresh political outreach by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in a state where it has struggled to recover from the fallout of the 2020-21 farm laws protest. However, the return of farmers to the Shambhu border over concerns surrounding the proposed India-US trade agreement has once again brought agrarian issues to the forefront.

Thousands of farmers gathered at the Punjab-Haryana border, while Haryana Police stopped them from marching towards Delhi. The scenes have drawn comparisons with both the 2020-21 farm laws protest and the farmers’ agitation witnessed in 2024.

BJP’s development narrative faces disruption

During his recent Punjab visit, Prime Minister Modi focused on development, infrastructure and investment, signalling the BJP’s intention to shift political discussions away from the farm laws controversy ahead of the Assembly elections, which are expected in about six months.

His decision to wear a green turban, a colour closely associated with Punjab’s farming community, was widely viewed as a symbolic gesture aimed at reaching out to rural voters.

However, the ongoing protest over the proposed India-US trade agreement has interrupted that narrative, with farmers once again mobilising at the Shambhu border.

Concerns over proposed India-US trade agreement

Farmer organisations have expressed concern that lower import duties under the proposed India-US trade agreement could allow heavily subsidised American agricultural and dairy products to enter the Indian market. They argue this could reduce domestic prices and negatively impact farmers’ incomes.

The groups have also maintained that waiting until the agreement is finalised would leave little opportunity to safeguard farmers’ interests.

Punjab BJP president Kewal Singh Dhillon has appealed to farmers not to draw conclusions before the agreement is finalised. He said no final pact has been signed and asserted there would be “no compromise on the interests of farmers and livestock rearers”. He also said Prime Minister Modi has assured that Punjab’s farmers would not be adversely affected.

Opposition steps up attack

The issue has quickly become a political flashpoint in Punjab.

The Congress has launched a campaign against the proposed trade agreement, alleging it could adversely affect the state’s agriculture and dairy sectors.

The Aam Aadmi Party has described the proposed pact as the “biggest betrayal of farmers” and has demanded that the Centre make the draft agreement public.

The Shiromani Akali Dal has also extended support to the agitation, accusing the Centre of ignoring the concerns of Punjab’s farming community.

Political implications ahead of Punjab polls

The BJP has been attempting to broaden its support beyond its traditional urban voter base by expanding its presence in rural Punjab ahead of the Assembly elections.

Political observers had viewed Prime Minister Modi’s recent visit as the beginning of that outreach. However, the renewed farmers’ mobilisation risks reviving memories of the 2020-21 farm laws agitation, which had significantly affected the BJP’s standing among many farmers in the state.

Unlike the earlier movement, which centred on domestic agricultural reforms, the current agitation focuses on a proposed international trade agreement. If the movement gathers further momentum, it could become India’s first large-scale farmers’ protest against a foreign trade pact, bringing renewed attention to how political parties balance international trade objectives with the interests of domestic agriculture.

With Assembly elections approaching, the renewed agitation has the potential to once again make farmers’ concerns a central issue in Punjab’s political discourse.

Continue Reading

India News

CJP warns of fresh protest if cases against students not withdrawn by Tuesday

The Cockroach Janta Party has threatened to resume protests if cases against students are not withdrawn, alleging the Centre violated assurances made during recent talks.

Published

12 hours ago

on

July 27, 2026

By

The Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) has warned that it will resume protests from Tuesday if the Centre does not withdraw cases filed against demonstrators and stop further police action against students involved in the nationwide agitation.

The Abhijeet Dipke-led movement, which began as a satirical campaign and later evolved into a nationwide protest over alleged examination irregularities, had ended its 37-day sit-in at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar over the weekend following discussions with the government.

According to the organisation, the protest was withdrawn in “good faith” after Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan resigned, one of the group’s key demands.

CJP alleges breach of assurances

CJP spokesperson Ashutosh Ranka alleged that authorities had failed to honour assurances made during negotiations by continuing police action against protesters.

In a post on X, he claimed that hundreds of students had been arrested in Bihar and West Bengal, while volunteers and protesters in Delhi and other states were facing surveillance and harassment.

Ranka urged senior ministers JP Nadda and Jitendra Singh, who represented the government during the talks, to ensure that all FIRs registered against protesters are withdrawn and that no fresh cases are filed by Delhi Police, central investigative agencies or police forces in BJP-allied states.

He also sought a written copy of the understanding reached during the negotiations regarding legal action against protesters.

Demands raised after talks with Centre

Following the third round of discussions held at the Constitution Club on Saturday, the CJP had said the Centre agreed to provide suitable compensation to the families of NEET aspirants who died by suicide and assured that FIRs lodged against protesters across the country would be withdrawn.

The organisation had submitted a five-point charter of demands to the government and said another round of talks would be held after four weeks.

One of the group’s major demands was the withdrawal of FIRs registered after the July 20 ‘Chalo Sansad’ march and a commitment that no further legal action would be initiated against protesters.

Police action and Parliament debate

Several FIRs were filed following clashes during the July 20 protest near Parliament after demonstrators attempted to march from Jantar Mantar towards Parliament.

Police used tear gas and batons to disperse the crowd, leading to clashes and multiple detentions.

On Monday, the issue echoed in Parliament as Opposition members repeatedly demanded a government response over the police crackdown on protesters.

Meanwhile, despite disruptions in the House, the government introduced a Bill in the Lok Sabha proposing stricter penalties for examination paper leaks.

Continue Reading

India News

India summons Ukrainian envoy after ships with Indian crew attacked in Black Sea

Published

16 hours ago

on

July 27, 2026

By

India has summoned the Ukrainian Ambassador after two merchant vessels carrying Indian crew were attacked in the Black Sea, raising concerns over the safety of Indians working in the conflict zone.

The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) described the incidents as a matter of serious concerns and conveyed India’s position directly to the Ukrainian envoy.

According to the MEA, the attacks took place amid the ongoing Russia-Ukrainian war, where commercial shipping has increasingly come under threat due to military operations. Although no deaths have been reported, several Indian seafarers were on board the affected vessels, prompting the government to seek immediate clarification from Ukraine and stress the need to ensure their safety.

During the meeting, the MEA reiterated that merchant ships engaged in commercial trade and civilian crew members must not become targets during armed conflict. India urged Ukraine to take all possible steps to prevent such incidents and to uphold international maritime law, which protects civilian shipping operating in international waters.

The ministry said it is in constant contact with Indian missions abroad, shipping companies, and maritime authorities to monitor the condition of Indian crew members. Officials have assured that diplomatic and consular assistance for the crew.

The attack have once again highlighted the dangers faced by thousands of Indian seafarers employed on international cargo vessels operating in conflict-affected regions. The continuing war has disrupted shipping routes in the Black Sea, creating risks for commercial trade and the safety of multinational crews.

The latest diplomatic move reflects India’s consistent position on the Russia-Ukraine conflict. While maintaining relations with both countries, India has repeatedly called for dialogue, a peaceful resolution to the conflict, and the protection of civilians and commercial vessels under international law.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com