Legal luminaries and experts hailed Thursday’s Supreme Court judgment as victory for common citizens which would have a far-reaching impact on almost all aspects of life.
Senior lawyer Sanjay Hegde said it was a watershed moment.
“I believe that this is the most significant judgment after Kesavananda Bharati case. With this judgment the court has overruled a lot of early disastrous decisions. [The] SC has broadly laid down the constitutional principle which every High Court should now take into account,” Mr. Hegde said.
Many of the previous judgments would have to revisited in the light of the verdict.
“Today’s judgment has prevented [the] government from going on slippery slope of totalitarianism. In a democratic society, as per rule of law my house is my castle. Now after this judgment, my own body and mind is mine. The government can’t tell me what to eat or what to wear. As long as I do not break a law they can’t intrude,” senior lawyer K.T.S Tulsi told The Hindu .
The unanimity of the nine-member bench was also landmark, said Justice (retired) Mukul Mudgal.
“It preserves the individuality of a person. But what is more interesting is that all the nine judges were on same page with regard to right to privacy as integral fundamental right,”Justice Mudgal said.
Impact on surveillance
Another important implication was in terms of government surveillance. “The judgment will have wide ranging impact. It will control how and whether government can read our email, listen to phone calls, how our data is used. It will also bear on whether married women will have the right not to get raped in marriage, after all women’s right to bodily integrity is privacy of the body,” senior lawyer Karuna Nundy said.
Not everyone believed that the judgment was significant.
Former Supreme Court Judge K T Thomas said the judgement had merely made an interpretation.
“Right to privacy was earlier a common law which through today’s judgment has transformed into fundamental right. It has now been brought under the ambit of Section 19 and 21 of the Constitution,” he said.
