Supreme Court on Balance Between Privacy and Public Interest: DPDP Act Challenge
The Supreme Court, while considering a petition challenging the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023 and the DPDP Rules, 2025, observed that public interest cannot justify broad access to the private information of public officials and emphasised that a balance must be struck between privacy rights and the right to know.
A key challenge concerns Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act, which amended Section 8(1)(j) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 — eliminating the earlier public interest override that permitted disclosure of personal information when it had a reasonable nexus with public activity.
Journalists, transparency activists, and RTI practitioners have argued the amendment tilts the balance decisively in favour of privacy at the cost of public accountability.
The Supreme Court issued notice to the government, referred the matter to a larger bench for hearing in March 2026, but declined to grant an interim stay on the DPDP Act.
The Court will determine whether the DPDP Act's restrictions on disclosure of personal data of public officials violate the Fundamental Right to freedom of expression and press freedom under Article 19(1)(a).
Right to Privacy as a Fundamental Right: Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017)
The right to privacy was unanimously declared a Fundamental Right by a nine-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India (2017).
The DPDP Act operates as the legislative framework implementing the privacy right affirmed in Puttaswamy; the Supreme Court must now determine whether the Act's specific restrictions on RTI disclosures satisfy the Puttaswamy proportionality standard.
Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023: Key Provisions
The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (DPDP Act) is India's first comprehensive data protection law, enacted after nearly a decade of deliberation following the Puttaswamy judgment.
Section 44(3)'s amendment to the RTI Act is the direct trigger for the Supreme Court challenge — it has effectively weakened RTI's accountability mechanism for public officials' personal information, raising questions about press freedom and the right to information.
Right to Information Act, 2005: Section 8(1)(j) and Public Interest Exception
The Right to Information Act, 2005 codifies the constitutional right to information as implicit in Article 19(1)(a) (freedom of speech and expression). Section 8 provides exemptions from disclosure.
The Supreme Court's observation that "public interest cannot justify broad access to private information" must be read in context — the Court was signalling it would apply the Puttaswamy proportionality test to determine whether the complete removal of the public interest exception goes too far.
- Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017): Right to privacy declared Fundamental Right under Article 21
- Nine-judge Constitution Bench judgment: 24 August 2017
- Overruled: M.P. Sharma (1954) and Kharak Singh (1963)
- Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023: India's first comprehensive data protection law
- DPDP Rules, 2025: Notified in January 2025
- Data Protection Board of India: Adjudicatory body under DPDP Act; penalties up to ₹250 crore
- Section 44(3) DPDP Act: Amends Section 8(1)(j) RTI Act — removes public interest override for personal data disclosure
- CPIO, Supreme Court v. Subhash Aggarwal (2019): Personal information of public officials disclosable if nexus with public activity exists
- Article 19(1)(a): Right to freedom of speech and expression — basis for right to information
- Article 21: Right to life and personal liberty — basis for right to privacy
- Puttaswamy proportionality test: Legality + Necessity + Proportionality