New RBI Grade B 2025 Notification will come Soon! Enroll Here

    Question

    Which is the right to privacy case?

    A Adm Jabalpur vs Shivkant shukla Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
    B Ramesh Thappar Vs. State of Madras Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
    C Justice K.S Puttuswamy Vs. Union of India Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
    D State of madras vs. Champakam Dorairajan. Correct Answer Incorrect Answer

    Solution

    In the case of Justice K.S Puttuswamy Vs. Union of India which is also known as the right to privacy case , A nine-judge bench of the Supreme Court of India held unanimously that the right to privacy was a constitutionally protected right in India, as well as being incidental to other freedoms guaranteed by the Indian Constitution. The case, brought by retired High Court Judge Puttaswamy, challenged the Government’s proposed scheme for a uniform biometrics-based identity card which would be mandatory for access to government services and benefits. The Government argued that the Constitution did not grant specific protection for the right to privacy. The Court reasoned that privacy is an incident of fundamental freedom or liberty guaranteed under Article 21 which provides that: “No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law” Romesh Thappar vs State of Madras - Freedom of Speech - Post publication prevention of circulation of crossroad weekly magazine resulted in violation of freedom of speech This judgment resulted into amendment in Article 19 of Indian Constitution. State of Madras vs Champakam Dorairajan - Caste based reservation in admission to the educational institution [This judgment resulted into amendment in Article 15 of Indian Constitution] Adm Jabalpur vs Shivkant shukla This case is also known as habeus  corpus case. During emergency many opposition leaders were detained. They challenged the govt action through writ petitions in various High Courts. Decisions of High Courts were challenged in Supreme Court and SC held that Fundamental Rights Can be suspended during emergency. Right to move to High Courts under Article 226 during emergency was in issue in this case.

    Practice Next