ARTICLE 21 – RIGHT TO

PRIVACY
PROF. N.B. CHANDRAKALA
DEPARTMENT OF LAW
SPMVV, TIRUPATI
 INTRODUCTION
ARTICLE 21 OF INDIAN CONSTITUTION

Article 21-Protection of Life And Personal Liberty:

No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to
procedure established by law.
The object of the fundamental right under Article 21 is to prevent encroachment
upon personal liberty and deprivation of life except according to procedure
established by law. It clearly means that this fundamental right has been
provided against state only.
 If an act of private individual amounts to encroachment upon the personal
liberty or deprivation of life of other person. Such violation would not fall under
the parameters set for the Article 21.
 The state cannot be defined in a restricted sense. It includes Government
Departments, Legislature, Administration, Local Authorities exercising statutory
powers and so on so forth, but it does not include non-statutory or private
bodies having no statutory powers.
 the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 relates only to the acts of
State or acts under the authority of the State which are not according to
procedure established by law
 The main object of Article 21 is that before a person is deprived of his life or
personal liberty by the State, the procedure established by law must be strictly
followed. 
 Right to Life means the right to lead meaningful, complete and dignified life. It
does not have restricted meaning. It is something more than surviving or animal
existence. 
 The fundamental right under Article 21 is one of the most important rights
provided under the Constitution which has been described as heart of
fundamental rights by the Apex Court.
According to Bhagwati, J., Article 21 “embodies a constitutional value of supreme
importance in a democratic society.”
Iyer, J., has characterized Article 21 as “the procedural magna carta protective of life
and liberty.
Article 21 applies to natural persons. The right is available to every person, citizen or
alien. Thus, even a foreigner can claim this right. 
In Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration, the Supreme Court reiterated with the
approval the above observations and held that the “right to life” included the right to
lead a healthy life so as to enjoy all faculties of the human body in their prime
conditions. 
In Nirmal Singh v. State of Punjab, it was held by the Court that fair investigation and
fair trail are concomitant to preservation of fundamental right of an accused under
Article 21 of the Constitution. A victim of crime is equally entitled to a fair
investigation.
RIGHT TO PRIVACY :
Right to privacy is one such right which has come to its existence after
widening up the dimensions of Article 21. The constitution in specific
doesn’t grant any right to privacy as such.
The Supreme Court has asserted that in order to treat a right as a
fundamental right, it is not necessary that it should be expressly stated
in the constitution as a Fundamental Right. Political, social, and
economic changes in the country entail the recognition of new rights.
The law in its eternal youth grows to meet the demands of society.
the word Privacy mean. According to Black’s Law Dictionary “right to be
let alone; the right of a person to be free from any unwarranted
publicity; the right to live without any unwarranted interference by the
public in matters with which the public is not necessarily concerned”.
In the earlier times in India, the law would give protection only from
physical dangers such as trespass from which the Right to Property
emerged to secure his house and cattle. This was considered to be
the Right to Life.
 Now the Right to Life has expanded in its scope and comprises the
right to be let alone the right to liberty secures the exercise of
extensive civil privileges; and the term “property” has grown to
comprise every form of possession — intangible, as well as tangible.
The Court has implied the right of privacy from Art.21 by
interpreting it in conformity with Art.12 of the Universal Declaration
on Human Rights and Art.17 of the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights, 1966. Both of these international documents
provide for the right of privacy.
The right to life enshrined in Article 21 has been liberally interpreted
so as to mean something more than mere survival and mere
existence or animal existence.
It therefore includes all those aspects of life which makes a man’s
life more meaningful, complete and worth living and right to privacy
is one such right. The first time this topic was ever raised was in the
case of Kharak Singh v. State of UP where the Supreme Court held
that Regulation 236 of UP Police regulation was unconstitutional as
it clashed with Article 21 of the Constitution.
It was held by the Court that the right to privacy is a part of right to
protection of life and personal liberty. Here, the Court had equated
privacy to personal liberty.
In M.P. Sharma v Satish Chandra were Supreme Court on the issue of ‘power of
search and seizure’ held that they cannot bring privacy as the fundament right
because it is something alien to Indian Constitution and constitution maker does not
bother about the right to privacy.  
After M.P. Sharma Case in Kharak Singh Case Supreme Court on the issue of
whether surveillance, defined under Regulation 236 of the U.P. Police Regulations is
amount to infringement of fundamental right and whether right privacy is come
under the purview of fundamental right; they denied the right to privacy as
fundamental right and they concluded that “the right of privacy is not a guaranteed
right under our Constitution and therefore the attempt to ascertain the movements of
an individual which is merely a manner in which privacy is invaded is not an
infringement of a fundamental right.
The next case was the Govind v State of MP  , where the right to privacy was
discussed in detailed. The issue was quite similar to the Kharak Singh v State of UP .
In Maneka Gandhi v Union of India  , Supreme Court interpreted the Article 21 in broad
sense. They said that both the rights of personal security and personal liberty recognized by
what Blackstone termed ‘natural law’ are embodied in Article 21. Maneka Gandhi Case
started the wide interpretation of Right to Life, which actually helped the Right to Privacy to
fall into to the scope of Right to Life.
Unni Krishnan v State of A.P. numbered the twelve meaning of right to life; and right to
privacy was one of them. 
R. Rajagopal alias R. R. Gopal v State of Tamil Nadu was the first case which explained the
evolution and scope of right to privacy in detail.
People s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) v Union of India is related to phone tapping and it
discussed that whether telephone tapping is an infringement of right to privacy under Article
21. Supreme Court argued that conversations on the telephone are often of an intimate and
confidential character and telephone-conversation is a part of modern man’s life. Supreme
Court also said that whether right to privacy can be claimed or has been infringed in a given
case would depend on the facts of the said case.
State Of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Babulal  , Supreme Court considered that
Sexual violence apart from being a dehumanizing act is also an unlawful
intrusion of the right to privacy and sanctity of a female.
 In Sharda v Dharmpal  , Supreme Court held that a matrimonial court has
the power to direct a party to undergo medical examination and passing of
such an order would not be in violation of right of privacy or personal
liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India  , in support of this
supreme court argued that information which is necessary for society
should not protected from the making known to other under right to
privacy.
After observation of these entire cases one can say that Right to Privacy is
related to individual’s personal liberty, which leads to be recognized as a
Right to Life.
Recent Developments like Neera Radia case, Ratan Tata petition against Phone
tapping, Aadhar Initiative etc. it has come under debate.
 
Aadhar – Privacy issue
 Aadhar initiative requires collection of personal data from residents of India, and
this has resulted in controversy regarding its potential to be missed. This is so
because:
 It requires collection of biometric details like iris scanning and finger prints 
which are essentially crucial details and could be misused.
 Cyber space is a vulnerable space and is prone to threat.
 Cyber security architecture is not very strong in India.
 Aadhar Lacks statutory back up and is running on an executive order, which has
also raised questions.
However, Aadhar in itself is a well-intentioned program so as to plug leakages and ensure
financial inclusion. This will lead to better targeting of subsidies and hence reduce the
burden of exchequer. But the costs should not outweigh the benefits.
Towards this end, government must:
 Strengthen cyber security system
 Assure by means of legislation that private details would bemust maintained private
 Judicial backing against violation of right to privacy. 
 This is the need of the hour as stalling of Aadhar doesn’t fare well for social security
programs.
What was Government’s view of Right to Privacy?
 Government told the SC that right to privacy is a fundamental right but it is a “wholly
qualified right”
 Government stand means ‘right to privacy’ could be subject to reasonable restrictions
Conclusion:

Right to privacy is an essential component of right to life and

personal liberty under Article 21. Right of privacy may, apart
from contract, also arise out of a particular specific relationship,
which may be commercial, matrimonial or even political. Right
to privacy is not an absolute right; it is subject to reasonable
restrictions for prevention of crime, disorder or protection of
health or morals or protection of rights and freedom of others.
Where there is a conflict between two derived rights, the right
which advances public morality and public interest prevails.