Introduction

The Right to Genome Privacy refers to an individual’s right to protect their complete genetic information—their genome—from unauthorised collection, analysis, storage, disclosure, or commercial exploitation. Unlike ordinary personal data, genomic information may reveal a person’s inherited characteristics, health risks, biological relationships, and ancestry. It may also disclose information about biological relatives who have never provided consent.

In India, genome privacy is not expressly codified as a separate fundamental right. Its constitutional foundation lies primarily in Article 21, which protects privacy, dignity, and personal liberty, and Article 14, which guarantees equality. The right to privacy recognised in K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India provides a basis for protecting genetic information from unjustified intrusion.

PRIVACY+1

Legal Framework and Scope

Genome privacy may protect against:

Collection of DNA or genomic samples without valid consent or lawful authority.

Unauthorised sequencing, storage, or disclosure of genetic information.

Genetic discrimination in employment, insurance, healthcare, or public services.

Unjustified retention or secondary use of genomic data.

Disclosure of genetic information that affects family members or biological relatives.

The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 may apply to genomic information processed in digital form, subject to its scope, exemptions, and commencement. India does not currently have a comprehensive, standalone Genome Privacy Act. The proposed DNA Technology (Use and Application) Regulation Bill, 2018 did not become an enacted statute.

PRS Legislative Research

Relevant Case Laws

1. K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) 10 SCC 1

The Supreme Court recognised privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21 and other constitutional freedoms. It connected privacy with dignity, autonomy, and control over personal information. This is the principal constitutional foundation for genome privacy, because genomic data reveals intimate information about identity, health, and family relationships.

Any State interference with genome privacy must satisfy legality, legitimate purpose, and proportionality.

PRIVACY+1

2. Bhabani Prasad Jena v. Orissa State Commission for Women (2010) 8 SCC 633

The Court held that DNA testing in paternity disputes is a sensitive matter and should not be ordered routinely. Courts must balance the need to discover the truth against the privacy and dignity of those required to undergo testing. DNA testing should be directed only where there is an “eminent need” and the issue cannot fairly be resolved through other evidence.

VoxJuris+1

3. Ashok Kumar v. Raj Gupta (2021) 1 SCC 20

The Supreme Court emphasised that DNA testing should not be ordered merely because a party seeks additional evidence. It applied the principles of privacy and proportionality and held that where the need for testing is not established, the individual’s privacy should receive protection.

VoxJuris

4. R. Rajendran v. Kamar Nisha (2025 INSC 1304)

The Supreme Court reiterated that compelling a person to undergo DNA testing is a serious intrusion into privacy and personal liberty. It held that such testing must satisfy legality, legitimate State aim, and proportionality. The Court refused to permit an unnecessary genetic inquiry where the dispute could be resolved through other evidence.

Sci API+1

Conclusion

The Right to Genome Privacy protects the confidentiality and integrity of an individual’s genetic information. Indian law supports this protection through constitutional privacy, dignity, and restrictions on unnecessary DNA testing. Puttaswamy, Bhabani Prasad Jena, and R. Rajendran demonstrate that genetic information is highly sensitive and that its collection or use must be legally justified. A sound legal framework should balance legitimate medical and scientific uses with consent, confidentiality, proportionality, and protection against discrimination.