Landmark Judgments On Privacy Breach Prosecutions
1. Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) vs. Union of India (2017)
Court: Supreme Court of India
Relevant Law: Constitution of India – Article 21 (Right to Privacy)
Facts:
This is the landmark case on privacy. The petition challenged the constitutional validity of the Aadhaar program, citing that it involved large-scale collection of personal data and could lead to misuse and privacy breaches.
Issue:
Whether the right to privacy is a fundamental right under the Indian Constitution and whether state collection of personal data can violate it.
Ruling:
The Supreme Court unanimously held that Right to Privacy is a fundamental right under Article 21.
Any unauthorized disclosure or misuse of personal data without consent is a violation of privacy.
The judgment laid down that both the state and private entities must take measures to protect personal data.
Significance:
Although not a prosecution case per se, it established the legal foundation for privacy breach cases, forming the basis for criminal and civil actions under IT Act Sections 43A and 66E.
2. Shreya Singhal vs. Union of India (2015)
Court: Supreme Court of India
Relevant Law: IT Act Section 66A (struck down), Sections 66E (privacy violation)
Facts:
The case challenged Section 66A of the IT Act, which criminalized offensive content online. Although the main issue was freedom of speech, the case involved prosecution of people for sharing content online, including personal information.
Issue:
Whether penal provisions for online content can restrict privacy rights of individuals.
Ruling:
Section 66A was struck down as unconstitutional for being vague, but Section 66E (punishing violation of privacy) remains valid.
IT Act Section 66E criminalizes capturing, publishing, or transmitting images of private areas without consent.
The judgment confirmed that unauthorized sharing of private data is prosecutable.
Significance:
It reinforced that digital privacy breaches are punishable under IT law, and consent is mandatory for using someone’s private information.
3. Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) vs. Telcos & Banks (2018)
Court: Supreme Court of India
Relevant Law: IT Act Sections 43A, 72, 72A (data breach & confidentiality)
Facts:
Several reports revealed unauthorized sharing of Aadhaar data by private companies and banks. Citizens’ personal and biometric data were at risk of being leaked.
Issue:
Whether leakage of sensitive personal information by private entities amounts to a privacy breach under IT law.
Ruling:
The Supreme Court emphasized that leakage of personal data is a violation of privacy under Article 21.
IT Act Section 43A makes companies liable for failing to implement reasonable security practices.
Penalties and prosecution can follow for companies or individuals responsible for the breach.
Significance:
Set a clear precedent that organizations handling personal data have legal obligations and breaches can lead to criminal prosecution.
4. Karmanya Singh Sareen vs. Union of India (2020)
Court: Delhi High Court
Relevant Law: IT Act Section 66E, 72, IPC Sections 66, 463
Facts:
The petitioner’s private images were leaked online without consent. The accused obtained the digital files and distributed them via social media platforms.
Issue:
Whether distribution of private digital content without consent amounts to criminal privacy breach.
Ruling:
The court held that sharing intimate digital content without consent is a violation of Section 66E of IT Act, punishable with imprisonment.
It also constituted cheating and forgery under IPC, as forged digital versions of consent forms were used.
The accused was prosecuted and sentenced.
Significance:
A landmark case in India recognizing revenge porn, digital leaks, and privacy violations as prosecutable crimes.
5. Anvar P.V vs. P.K. Basheer & Ors (2014)
Court: Supreme Court of India
Relevant Law: IT Act Section 65B (admissibility of electronic evidence), Section 66E
Facts:
The case involved unauthorized access and sharing of private emails and electronic documents. The lower courts had questioned the admissibility of digital evidence, delaying prosecution.
Issue:
Whether digital evidence showing unauthorized access and breach of private data can be relied upon in court.
Ruling:
The Supreme Court clarified that electronic records admissible under Section 65B of Evidence Act can be used to prosecute privacy breaches.
Unauthorized access, copying, and distribution of private digital data is punishable under IT Act Sections 66 and 66E.
Significance:
This case strengthened the evidentiary basis for prosecuting privacy breaches, ensuring that electronic proof is valid for conviction.
✅ Key Legal Principles from These Cases
Right to Privacy is Fundamental – Article 21 protects citizens against unauthorized data use.
IT Act Sections 66E, 43A, 72 – Criminalize capturing, sharing, or leaking private information.
Digital Evidence is Admissible – Section 65B Evidence Act allows prosecution based on electronic proof.
Consent is Mandatory – Unauthorized collection or distribution of personal data is a criminal act.
Organizations are Liable – Companies handling personal data must implement reasonable security practices.
RELATED Blog
0 comments