Judicial Interpretation Of Privacy Rights And Bodily Autonomy
🔐 I. Right to Privacy and Bodily Autonomy: Foundational Concepts
What is Privacy?
Privacy is the right to be let alone – to make decisions about one's body, family, relationships, and personal matters without arbitrary state interference.
What is Bodily Autonomy?
Bodily autonomy refers to the individual's right to make decisions over their own body, including reproductive choices, medical treatment, and sexual identity.
These rights are interrelated and often interpreted under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution:
“No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.”
🇮🇳 INDIAN CASE LAWS
1. Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017)
Citation: (2017) 10 SCC 1
Issue: Whether the right to privacy is a fundamental right under the Constitution of India.
🔍 Facts:
Retired Justice Puttaswamy challenged the constitutionality of the Aadhaar scheme, arguing that it violated privacy rights by collecting biometric data.
🧑⚖️ Judgment:
A 9-judge bench unanimously held that Right to Privacy is a fundamental right under Articles 14, 19, and 21.
Privacy is intrinsic to dignity and liberty.
The Court emphasized informational privacy, bodily integrity, and decisional autonomy as core aspects of privacy.
🧩 Relevance to Bodily Autonomy:
Recognized bodily autonomy as essential to privacy.
It laid the foundation for later rulings on reproductive rights, LGBTQ+ rights, and data protection.
2. Suchita Srivastava v. Chandigarh Administration (2009)
Citation: (2009) 9 SCC 1
Issue: Can a woman with mental disabilities be forced to terminate her pregnancy?
🔍 Facts:
A woman with mild mental retardation was pregnant as a result of rape. The Chandigarh Administration sought to terminate her pregnancy without her consent.
🧑⚖️ Judgment:
Supreme Court ruled in favor of the woman’s right to continue her pregnancy.
Reproductive autonomy is a fundamental part of personal liberty.
The state cannot make decisions on behalf of women about their pregnancies unless they are mentally incapable of informed consent.
🧩 Significance:
First strong articulation of reproductive autonomy as part of privacy under Article 21.
Recognized bodily integrity and consent as paramount.
3. Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018)
Citation: (2018) 10 SCC 1
Issue: Constitutional validity of Section 377 IPC (criminalizing consensual same-sex relations).
🔍 Facts:
Petitioners challenged the criminalization of consensual sexual acts between adults of the same sex as violating privacy, dignity, and equality.
🧑⚖️ Judgment:
Section 377 was declared unconstitutional insofar as it criminalized consensual sex between adults.
Court held that sexual orientation is an essential attribute of privacy.
Any restriction on consensual acts between adults violates dignity and bodily autonomy.
🧩 Importance:
Reinforced privacy as including sexual and identity-based autonomy.
Affirmed the freedom to make intimate personal decisions without fear of state punishment.
4. Common Cause v. Union of India (2018)
Citation: (2018) 5 SCC 1
Issue: Whether passive euthanasia and living wills are constitutionally valid.
🔍 Facts:
A PIL was filed seeking the legalization of passive euthanasia and recognition of a person’s right to refuse life support.
🧑⚖️ Judgment:
The Supreme Court recognized the right to die with dignity as part of the right to life under Article 21.
Validated living wills and allowed passive euthanasia under strict safeguards.
Emphasized bodily autonomy in end-of-life decisions.
🧩 Significance:
Recognized autonomy over one’s body even at the terminal stages of life.
Integrated the idea of consent and control over medical decisions as essential to dignity and privacy.
5. Devika Biswas v. Union of India (2016)
Citation: (2016) 10 SCC 726
Issue: Mass sterilizations in Bihar under unhygienic conditions and without informed consent.
🔍 Facts:
Public Interest Litigation was filed after a sterilization camp resulted in the death of several women due to unsafe procedures.
🧑⚖️ Judgment:
The Court condemned coercive sterilization practices.
Emphasized that reproductive health and rights fall within the ambit of Article 21.
Reproductive decisions must be voluntary, informed, and dignified.
🧩 Importance:
Reinforced bodily integrity and reproductive rights as key components of privacy.
Recognized the state’s positive obligation to protect reproductive health.
🇺🇸 U.S. CASES (Comparative Perspective)
6. Roe v. Wade (1973) – U.S. Supreme Court
Overturned in 2022 by Dobbs v. Jackson
🧑⚖️ Holding:
Recognized a woman’s constitutional right to choose abortion under the right to privacy (from the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment).
Established a trimester framework balancing state interest and bodily autonomy.
🧩 Influence:
Roe significantly impacted global reproductive rights discourse.
While now overturned in the U.S., it continues to inspire decisions in other jurisdictions, including India.
7. Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992)
Modified Roe v. Wade but upheld core right
🔍 Holding:
Reaffirmed the constitutional right to abortion but allowed regulations that do not place an “undue burden” on the woman.
Emphasized personal liberty and bodily integrity.
✒️ Conclusion
The judicial interpretation of privacy and bodily autonomy has evolved to:
Recognize that personal choices in matters of body, sex, reproduction, and death are central to dignity.
Require the state to respect individual agency, and not impose coercive or paternalistic interventions.
🔑 Key Takeaways:
Privacy is a fundamental right rooted in liberty and dignity (Puttaswamy).
Bodily autonomy includes reproductive, sexual, and medical choices (Suchita Srivastava, Common Cause).
The state cannot override personal decisions unless there is a compelling and proportionate justification
RELATED Blog
comments