Last Modified: Wed, Aug 05 2015. 09 43 PM IST
Attorney general Mukul Rohatgi says as per earlier judgments of larger benches of SC, privacy was not a part of liberty under Article 21
The hearings related to privacy are part of a case in which the validity of Aadhaar, or the Unique Identification project, has been challenged on grounds that it violated privacy. Photo: Mint
New Delhi: There is a lack of clarity on the issue of the right to privacy as a fundamental right, attorney general Mukul Rohatgi told the Supreme Court on Wednesday, requesting that a case related to the validity of the Aadhaar scheme be referred to a constitutional bench of five judges.
Rohatgi told the court that as per earlier judgments of larger benches of the apex court, privacy was not a part of liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. Privacy, thus, didn’t find any place in the Constitution, Rohatgi said, citing judgments.
However, justice J. Chelameswar, sitting in a bench of three with justices S.A. Bobde and C. Nagappan, asked what remained in Article 21 (which guarantees right to life and personal liberty) if privacy wasn’t a part of it.
“As long as the word (liberty) remains there (in Article 21), we have to give it meaning. Just to say that it’s not at all there is something we’ll not accept,” Chelameswar added.
The hearings related to privacy are part of a case in which the validity of Aadhaar, or the Unique Identification project, has been challenged on grounds that it violated privacy.
The government has contended that a three-judge bench can’t hear the case in light of contrary views held by larger bench decisions earlier.