"The right to be let alone-the most comprehensive of right and the right most valued by civilized men." Justice Louis Brandeis's dictum captures the core of privacy, a notion that has become increasingly significant in contemporary life. Although it is frequently seen as essential to human dignity, India did not previously formally recognize privacy as a fundamental right. But as time went on, it changed to become a fundamental component of personal autonomy, especially in light of the quick development of technology.

Historically, the concept of privacy in India was not a significant part of legal discourse. Traditional Indian society valued community and familial ties over individual autonomy which often meant that privacy was not viewed as a separate, inviolable right. Privacy was largely confined to the personal sphere associated with the sanctity of one's home and family life. The Indian legal system, rooted in colonial laws initially did not emphasize privacy as a legal or constitutional right. Instead, the focus was more on public order, security and morality, with little room for personal privacy.

It wasn't until the mid-20th century, with the advent of the Indian Constitution, that the conversation around privacy began to take shape. Even then, privacy was not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution. The early years of independent India's jurisprudence saw limited recognition of privacy with courts often deferring to the state's interests over individual privacy concerns.

In India, the importance of privacy has been highlighted by several high-profile cases, such as the Aadhaar case which questioned the balance between state surveillance and individual privacy. The 2017 landmark judgment by the Supreme Court in the Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India case, which recognized privacy as a fundamental right has marked a significant turning point. This judgment has laid the foundation for privacy rights in the digital era and emphasize that privacy is not just a luxury but a necessity in a world where personal information is constantly at risk.

Judicial Evolution of the Right to Privacy in India

The right to privacy in India has evolved over several decades through a series of judicial pronouncements. Initially, the courts were reluctant to recognize privacy as a fundamental right. However, over time, with changing societal values and increasing awareness of individual freedoms, the judiciary began to acknowledge privacy's importance, ultimately culminating in its recognition as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.

M.P. Sharma v. Satish Chandra[1]
The first significant case dealing with privacy in India was M.P. Sharma v. Satish Chandra. In this case, the issue at hand was whether the search and seizure of documents by the government violated the privacy of individuals. The petitioners argued that such actions infringed upon their right to privacy. The Supreme Court, disregarded this argument and held that the right to privacy was not expressly protected by the Constitution. The Court ruled that there had been no fundamental rights violated and that search and seizure had been lawful uses of state power.

The decision signaled a shift in the judiciary's attitude toward privacy, one that was typified by a refusal to acknowledge it as a fundamental constitutional right. The ruling was in line with the larger post-independence Indian setting, which prioritized state authority and control over individual liberty. Privacy was viewed as less important at this moment in history than other constitutional rights.

Kharak Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh[2]
The following key case in the judicial evolution of the right to privacy was Kharak Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh. In this case, Kharak Singh, the petitioner, challenged the police's practice of domiciliary visits and monitoring and claims that it infringed his fundamental rights, particularly his privacy. In this case, the Supreme Court rendered a divided decision.

According to the majority view, the right to privacy was not expressly recognized by the Constitution. Though it was not stated specifically, the Court did recognize that the right to personal privacy might be included in the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Court declared that the practice of domiciliary visits was illegal since it infringed upon the personal liberty of the individual. The Court did, however, uphold other police surveillance methods.

Justice Subba Rao in his minority opinion argued more strongly for the recognition of privacy as a fundamental right. He stated that Article 21, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, inherently includes the right to privacy. Although his view was not accepted at the time but it laid the groundwork for future discussions on the right to privacy in India.

Govind v. State of Madhya Pradesh[3]
Govind v. State of Madhya Pradesh was a significant milestone in the legal development of the right to privacy. Similar police monitoring difficulties as in Kharak Singh were present in this case. The Madhya Pradesh Police Regulations provided for monitoring of repeat offenders including domiciliary visits and shadowing. The petitioner, Govind, contested these regulation's validity.

The Supreme Court, in this case, took a more nuanced approach compared to previous rulings. The Court acknowledged that while the Constitution did not explicitly guarantee a right to privacy, certain aspects of privacy could be protected under Article 21, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty. The Court held that the right to privacy was not absolute and could be restricted in the interest of public safety and order. However, any such restriction had to be reasonable and must not be arbitrary or excessive.

Govind v. State of Madhya Pradesh was significant because it marked the first time the Supreme Court explicitly recognized the right to privacy as a component of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21, albeit in a limited form.

R. Rajagopal v. State of Tamil Nadu [4]
The case of R. Rajagopal v. State of Tamil Nadu, also known as the "Auto Shankar case," marked a significant advancement in the recognition of the right to privacy in India, particularly in the context of media freedom and defamation. The incident occurred when R. Rajagopal, a Tamil Nadu journalist, attempted to publish the autobiography of a convicted criminal, Auto Shankar, which allegedly contained information implicating multiple police officers. The state tried to prevent the release, alleging that it would harm the reputations of the officials involved.

The petitioners challenged the proceedings, asserting the right to publish the book under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, which protects free speech and expression. The Supreme Court, in this case, delivered a landmark judgment recognizing the right to privacy as an essential aspect of Article 21. The Court held that the right to privacy could be invaded only in exceptional circumstances where there was a compelling state interest. It also ruled that no individual could publish any matter concerning another person's private life without their consent unless it was in public interest or based on public records.

The R. Rajagopal judgment was significant because it expanded the scope of the right to privacy beyond physical intrusion to include the right to control the publication of personal information. The Court emphasized that the right to privacy was integral to personal dignity and autonomy. However, it also acknowledged the need to balance privacy rights with freedom of the press, especially when matters of public interest were involved.

Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India
The culmination of the judicial evolution of the right to privacy in India occurred in the landmark case of Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India. This case arose from challenges to the government's Aadhaar scheme, which involved the collection and storage of biometric data from Indian citizens. The petitioners argued that the mandatory collection of biometric data violated the right to privacy. In order to investigate whether the Indian Constitution's guarantee of privacy was a basic right, the Supreme Court assembled a nine-judge bench.

The Court ruled unanimously that the right to privacy was a fundamental right that was safeguarded by other constitutional provisions, including the rights to equality and freedom as well as being ingrained in the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21.

The Court's judgment in the Puttaswamy case was comprehensive and far-reaching. It overruled the earlier decisions in M.P. Sharma and Kharak Singh, which had held that the Constitution did not recognize a right to privacy. The Court stated that privacy was an essential aspect of human dignity and autonomy and it encompassed a wide range of interests including the privacy of personal information, bodily privacy and decisional autonomy.

Conclusion
The evolution of the right to privacy in India is a testament to the dynamic nature of constitutional interpretation which reflect the changing societal values and the increasing importance of individual freedoms. Initially, privacy was not recognized as a fundamental right, with the judiciary prioritizing state authority and public order over individual privacy.

The early cases, such as M.P. Sharma v. Satish Chandra and Kharak Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, highlighted this reluctance as the courts did not explicitly acknowledge privacy as a separate right instead focusing on broader issues of state power and security. However, as societal values evolved and the importance of individual autonomy became more pronounced the judiciary began to gradually recognize the significance of privacy.

This shift was evident in cases like Govind v. State of Madhya Pradesh, where the Supreme Court acknowledged that certain aspects of privacy could be protected under the right to life and personal liberty although it still allowed for reasonable restrictions in the interest of public safety. This marked a significant step forward in the recognition of privacy and laid the groundwork for its eventual acceptance as a fundamental right.

The culmination of this judicial evolution came with the landmark Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India case, where the Supreme Court unequivocally recognized the right to privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. This judgment marked a turning point in Indian constitutional law which assert that privacy is integral to human dignity and autonomy and is protected by various constitutional provisions. The Court's ruling in the Puttaswamy case not only overturned earlier decisions that had denied the existence of a right to privacy but also set a strong foundation for the protection of privacy in the digital age.

End Notes:

1. 1954 AIR 300
2. 1963 AIR 1295
3. 1975 AIR 1378
4. 1995 AIR 264

Written By: Vageesha Kumre, Advocate - Delhi High Court