| Court | Supreme Court of India |
|---|---|
| Citation | (2017) 10 SCC 1 |
| Decided | 24 August 2017 |
| Bench | 9 judges, led by Chief Justice J.S. Khehar |
Facts
Justice K.S. Puttaswamy, a retired judge of the Karnataka High Court, challenged the Aadhaar scheme as violating privacy. The government argued that the Constitution didn't recognise a fundamental right to privacy, relying on M.P. Sharma (1954, 8 judges) and Kharak Singh (1962, 6 judges). To settle the question, it was referred to a nine-judge bench.
Issue
Is the right to privacy a fundamental right under the Constitution of India?
Held
- Unanimously (9โ0), the right to privacy is a fundamental right. It is intrinsic to life and personal liberty under Article 21 and part of the freedoms in Part III.
- M.P. Sharma and Kharak Singh were overruled to the extent they held otherwise.
- Privacy includes bodily integrity, personal autonomy, informational privacy and the privacy of choice.
- Privacy is not absolute. Any intrusion must meet a three-part test: (i) legality, meaning a law must authorise it; (ii) a legitimate state aim; and (iii) proportionality, meaning the means must be rationally connected to the aim and not excessive.
The validity of Aadhaar itself was decided separately in 2018 (Puttaswamy (Aadhaar), 5 judges), which upheld the scheme with significant limits.
Why it matters
- It underpins later decisions including Navtej Singh Johar (2018, decriminalising consensual same-sex relations) and Joseph Shine (2018, striking down adultery).
- It shaped India's data protection law, the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023.
- Its proportionality test is now the standard way courts assess state action that limits fundamental rights.
Exam one-liner
Privacy is a fundamental right under Article 21 and Part III, subject to legality, legitimate aim and proportionality. (Puttaswamy, 2017, 9 judges, unanimous)