under Indian constitution right to privacy with special reference to marriage

1. BY ANGIKA JAISWAL
LL.M (1ST SEM.)
ROLL NO- 1713131003
SUBJECT- RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
SCHOOL OF LAW AND GOVERNANCE
CENTRAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH BIHAR, GAYA

2. MEANING AND TYPES OF PRIVACY
 Privacy is the protection of individual autonomy and relation
between an individual and society.
 Generally concept of privacy may be categorized into four
types:
1. Information privacy
2. Bodily privacy
3. Communication privacy
4. Territorial privacy

3. TYPES OF PRIVACY
1. INFORMATION PRIVACY
Right of individuals to control personal information like financial and
medical information comes with in the ambit of information privacy.
2. BODILY PRIVACY
It involves protection of peoples physical selves against invasive
procedure such as genetic test, drug testing and cavity searches.
3. COMMUNICATION PRIVACY
It concern with the privacy of communication made using postal mail,
telephones, email, and other technologies.

4. 4. TERRITORIAL PRIVACY
It involves setting limits on incursion into domestic and other
environments such as workplace, public space includes searches videos
surveillance and id checks.

5. INTERNATIONAL PROVISIONS
 Article -12 of Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) states that
“No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family,
home or correspondence nor to attack upon his honour and reputation.
Everyone has the right to protection of the law against such interference or
attacks.”
 Article-17 of International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights (to which
India is a party) states “No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful
interference with his privacy, family, home and correspondence, nor to
unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation”
 Due to UDHR and ICCPR these rights are directly binding upon India as it
is signatory to both (UDHR & ICCPR) these international convention

6.  Article-8 of European Convention on Human Rights states “Everyone has
the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his
correspondence; there shall be no interference by a public authority except
such as is in accordance with law and is necessary in a democratic society in
the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of
the country, for the protection of health or morals or for the protection of the
rights and freedoms of others.”

7. INDIAN CONSTITUTION AND RIGHT TO PRIVACY
 Article-21 of constitution to India right to privacy has been
interpreted as an unarticulated fundamental right.
 The growing violation of this right by the state on grounds
encourage the Indian judiciary to take a procreative role in
protecting this right.
 The land mark judgment with respect to this issue is Kharak
Singh v. State of U.P AIR 1962
 The supreme court held that right to privacy falls with the
scope of Article -21 of the constitution of India and therefore
concluded that on unauthorized incursion into a personal home
and disturbances cause to him is in violation of personal liberty
of the individual.

8.  However in Govind v. State of M.P AIR 1972 the supreme court qualified
the right to privacy and held that violation of privacy could be possible
under the sanction of law.
 Another significant case related to right to privacy was People’s Union Of
Civil Liberties V. Union Of India AIR 1996 the case was primarily involve
with the issue of telephone taping and held that taping a persons telephone
line violated his right to privacy unless it was required in the gravest of
grave circumstances such as public emergency

9. RIGHT TO PRIVACY IN MARRIAGE
 When the sensational case of Vinod Kaushik vs Madhvika Joshi AIR 2010
came up, the issue of alleged hacking of e-mail of husband and father-in-
law by daughter-in-law came to limelight. The father-son duo alleged that
their daughter-in-law did so to support her dowry case she had earlier filed
separately with the Pune police, when the couple was staying in Pune.
 Hacking the personal email of the husband or wife by the other party can
also be a ground for divorce. It’s a new dimension which is being added to
matrimonial disputes and divorce law. Moreover, as evidence is quite
concrete and visible when such offense is done, the courts don’t face
problem of believing or not believing in the evidence presented.

10. DIVORCE FOR BREACH OF PRIVACY WHEN
EMAIL IS HACKED
 The Information Technology Act, 2000 highlights about the evidence that
can be used to prove matrimonial dispute. The data can be stored in a
computer, laptop, mobile phone, tablet or any other computer resource. If
the collected data shows an alleged adultery by a wife, the husband would
present the proof of the same from the emails, whatsapps and other social
media interaction she has exchanged with her boyfriend/paramour.
 However, it’s not authorized to have illegal access to the email or personal
data of the husband or wife to gather the evidence. For instance, if the
husband hacks his wife’s email accounts or unauthorized accesses her SMSs
he is liable under the Information Technology Act to compensate his wife
for the alleged unauthorized access and is liable to be punished for hacking
under the Information Technology Act, 2000.

11.  Unauthorized access of email to gather evidence
 The Information Technology Act, 2000 says that the act of viewing data in
another person’s computer, computer resource or mobile phone without
such person’s consent is criminal offense. The law also makes it criminal to
touch another person’s computer or mobile phone without their permission
and holds it liable to pay compensation for the injury caused.
 The ruling in the case of Vinod Kaushik v. Madhvika Joshi AIR 2010 is
important as here it was held that it’s an extension of this concept of the
fundamental right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution. The concept
of right to privacy was included in the relationship of marriage as well
which operates within a matrimonial houses.
 The party that gets the evidence accessing the data from the other party’s
computer, phone and other similar devices does not come to the court with
clean hands. This can negatively affect the remedies available to him or her.

12.  OTHER RELEVANT CASES
 In Rayala M. Bhuvneswari v. Nagaphomender Rayala AIR 2008
Husband Tapping Conversation of his wife with others seeking to
produce in Court, Violates her Right To Privacy Under Article 21
 In Mr. X v. Hospital Z SC AIR 1999, it was held that where there is a clash
of two fundamental rights, as in the instant case, namely, the appellant’s
right to privacy as a part of right to life and other person’s right to lead a
healthy life which is her fundamental right u/a 21, the right which would
advance the public morality or public interest, would alone be enforced
through the process of Court, for the reason that moral consideration cannot
be kept at bay and judges are not expected to sit as mute structures of clay
as in Hail, known as Courtroom but have to be sensitive, “in the sense that
they must keep their fingers firmly upon the pulse of the accepted morality
of the day”.

13. THANK YOU