Consider the following statements regarding Surveillance and the Telegraph Act, 1885:
1. The Information Technology Act, 2000, incorporates the procedural safeguards of the 1885 Telegraph Act, and it grants the District Magistrate the power to authorize interception of electronic data in all cases.
2. The 1996 PUCL v. Union of India judgment established guidelines for telephone tapping, and it designated the Home Secretary as the primary authority for approving interception requests in every state jurisdiction.
3. Rule 419A of the Indian Telegraph Rules, 1951, introduced in 2007, provides that interception orders are subject to review by a committee chaired by the Cabinet Secretary at the central level.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 3 is correct as Rule 419A, inserted in 2007, mandates that interception orders be reviewed by a high-level committee chaired by the Cabinet Secretary (Centre) or the Chief Secretary (State). Statement 1 is incorrect because the IT Act, 2000, operates under Section 69, and the power to authorize interception is vested in the Union or State Home Secretary, not the District Magistrate. Statement 2 is incorrect because while the PUCL judgment established crucial procedural safeguards, it mandated that the Home Secretary of the Union or State government be the authorizing authority, not that the Union Home Secretary must approve every request in every state jurisdiction.
Consider the following statements regarding Right to be forgotten vs. freedom of speech:
1. The Information Technology Act of 2000 includes provisions for the right to be forgotten under Section 43A, which was originally drafted to address the removal of defamatory content from private social media accounts.
2. The Supreme Court of India in the K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) judgment affirmed that the right to privacy is a fundamental right protected under Article 21 of the Constitution.
3. Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution guarantees the freedom of speech and expression, which often conflicts with the individual's claim to be forgotten in the digital domain.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect.
Statement 2 is correct as the nine-judge bench in K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) unanimously declared privacy a fundamental right under Article 21. Statement 3 is correct because the 'right to be forgotten' often clashes with the public's right to information and the media's freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a). Statement 1 is incorrect because the IT Act, 2000 does not explicitly contain a 'right to be forgotten'; Section 43A deals with compensation for failure to protect sensitive personal data, and the concept of the right to be forgotten is currently a matter of judicial interpretation rather than a statutory provision.
Consider the following statements regarding Biometric data collection and Aadhaar linkage:
1. The 2019 amendments to the Prevention of Money Laundering Act introduced provisions allowing voluntary use of Aadhaar for bank account opening, following the recommendations of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) peer review.
2. The Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019, as proposed by the Justice B.N. Srikrishna Committee, included a clause that permitted the state to process biometric data for national security purposes without seeking individual consent.
3. Under the Information Technology (Reasonable Security Practices and Procedures and Sensitive Personal Data or Information) Rules, 2011, biometric information is classified as sensitive personal data.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 3 is correct because the 2011 IT Rules explicitly categorize biometric information as 'sensitive personal data' requiring stringent protection. Statement 1 is incorrect because the 2019 PMLA amendments allowed voluntary Aadhaar authentication for banking to comply with the Supreme Court's Puttaswamy judgment, not FATF recommendations. Statement 2 is incorrect because the Srikrishna Committee's 2018 draft report and the 2019 Bill were distinct, and the Bill faced significant criticism precisely for its broad state exemptions, which were not a direct recommendation of the Srikrishna Committee in the manner stated.
Consider the following statements regarding Reproductive autonomy and bodily integrity:
1. The Medical Termination of Pregnancy (Amendment) Act, 2021, extended the gestation limit for termination of pregnancy from 20 weeks to 24 weeks for specific categories of vulnerable women.
2. In the Suchita Srivastava v. Chandigarh Administration (2009) case, the Supreme Court held that a woman's right to make reproductive choices is a dimension of personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
3. Article 16(1)(e) of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) recognizes the right of women to decide freely and responsibly on the number and spacing of their children.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
Statement 1 is correct as the 2021 Amendment increased the MTP limit from 20 to 24 weeks for specific vulnerable groups, including survivors of sexual assault and minors. Statement 2 is correct because the Supreme Court in Suchita Srivastava (2009) explicitly linked reproductive autonomy to the right to privacy and personal liberty under Article 21. Statement 3 is correct as India is a signatory to CEDAW, and Article 16(1)(e) mandates that states ensure women have the same rights as men to decide the number and spacing of their children.
Consider the following statements regarding Privacy in the context of matrimonial litigation:
1. The Special Marriage Act, 1954, provides for the registration of marriages between persons of different religions and includes a provision that requires the publication of notice in a national newspaper for 30 days.
2. The Supreme Court in Sharda v. Dharmpal (2003) ruled that a matrimonial court possesses the power to order a DNA test, provided such an order does not violate the personal liberty of the individual.
3. The Information Technology Act, 2000, covers the protection of sensitive personal data in legal proceedings and provides for the automatic deletion of digital evidence once a matrimonial decree is passed.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 2 is correct as the Supreme Court in Sharda v. Dharmpal (2003) held that courts can order DNA tests in matrimonial disputes to determine legitimacy, provided it does not infringe upon the right to personal liberty. Statement 1 is incorrect because the Special Marriage Act, 1954, requires the notice to be published in a local newspaper, not a national one, and the 30-day period is for inviting objections, not a mandatory publication requirement in a national daily. Statement 3 is incorrect because the IT Act, 2000, does not contain any provision for the automatic deletion of digital evidence upon the passing of a matrimonial decree.
Consider the following statements regarding K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) judgment:
1. The nine-judge bench in K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India delivered its unanimous verdict on 24 August 2017.
2. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud authored the lead opinion, stating that privacy is a natural right which emerges from the guarantee of life and personal liberty under Article 21.
3. The Supreme Court bench comprised 11 judges who deliberated for 38 days before concluding that privacy constitutes a fundamental right under Article 14 of the Constitution.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as the nine-judge bench delivered its unanimous verdict on 24 August 2017, and Statement 2 is correct because Justice D.Y. Chandrachud authored the lead opinion affirming privacy as an intrinsic part of Article 21. Statement 3 is incorrect because the judgment was delivered by a nine-judge bench, not eleven, and the Court ruled that privacy is a fundamental right protected under Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty) and Part III of the Constitution, rather than solely Article 14.
Consider the following statements regarding Surveillance and the Telegraph Act, 1885:
1. The Supreme Court in the 2017 K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India judgment held that the right to privacy is a fundamental right protected under Article 21 of the Constitution.
2. The Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, was enacted following the recommendations of the 1882 Select Committee, and it empowers the President to suspend communication services during peacetime operations.
3. Section 5(2) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, permits the interception of messages during the occurrence of any public emergency or in the interest of public safety.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as the nine-judge bench in K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) unanimously declared privacy a fundamental right under Article 21. Statement 3 is correct because Section 5(2) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, explicitly allows the Central or State government to intercept messages on grounds of public emergency or public safety. Statement 2 is incorrect because, while the Act was enacted in 1885, it does not grant the President the power to suspend communication services; rather, such powers are derived from the Temporary Suspension of Telecom Services (Public Emergency or Public Safety) Rules, 2017, which were notified under the Indian Telegraph Act.
Consider the following statements regarding Sexual orientation and the decriminalization of Section 377:
1. The Supreme Court of India in Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018) declared that Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, insofar as it criminalized consensual sexual acts between adults in private, was unconstitutional.
2. In the 2017 K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India judgment, a nine-judge bench unanimously recognized the right to privacy as a fundamental right protected under Article 21 of the Constitution.
3. The Yogyakarta Principles, adopted in 2006, serve as a set of international guidelines addressing the application of international human rights law in relation to sexual orientation and gender identity.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
All three statements are correct. In Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018), the Supreme Court decriminalized consensual same-sex acts by striking down parts of Section 377 as violative of Articles 14, 15, 19, and 21. The K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) judgment established the right to privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21, providing the constitutional foundation for the Navtej Singh Johar verdict. The Yogyakarta Principles (2006) are internationally recognized guidelines that articulate how human rights law applies to issues of sexual orientation and gender identity.
Consider the following statements regarding Biometric data collection and Aadhaar linkage:
1. The Aadhaar Act, 2016, incorporates the recommendations of the Justice A.P. Shah Committee report, which suggested the creation of a statutory body to manage the Unique Identification Authority of India.
2. Regulation 12 of the Aadhaar (Authentication and Offline Verification) Regulations, 2022, outlines the protocols for entities to perform biometric authentication using fingerprint or iris scans.
3. The Supreme Court's 2018 judgment in the Aadhaar case struck down Section 57 of the Aadhaar Act, which allowed private entities to use Aadhaar for identity verification.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because the Justice A.P. Shah Committee report (2012) recommended a comprehensive privacy framework, but the Aadhaar Act, 2016, was criticized for failing to fully incorporate its robust data protection safeguards. Statement 2 is correct as the 2022 Regulations establish the specific technical and security protocols for biometric authentication to ensure data integrity. Statement 3 is correct because the Supreme Court in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India (2018) struck down Section 57, ruling that private entities cannot mandate Aadhaar-based authentication as it violates the right to privacy.
Consider the following statements regarding Data localization and sovereign control over data:
1. The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, include provisions for the localization of metadata related to end-to-end encrypted messaging services under the supervision of the Supreme Court.
2. The Budapest Convention on Cybercrime, which India signed in 2001, provides a framework for cross-border access to electronic evidence and sovereign control over national data repositories.
3. The 2022 draft of the Digital Personal Data Protection Bill incorporated a provision that classifies all financial transaction records as sensitive personal data subject to review by the Financial Intelligence Unit.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because the IT Rules, 2021 do not mandate metadata localization under Supreme Court supervision, but rather require significant social media intermediaries to enable the identification of the first originator of information. Statement 2 is incorrect as India has not signed or ratified the Budapest Convention, primarily due to concerns regarding sovereignty and the lack of reciprocity in data access. Statement 3 is incorrect because the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, does not classify all financial records as sensitive personal data, nor does it subject them to a blanket review by the Financial Intelligence Unit.
Consider the following statements regarding Encryption and national security concerns:
1. The Supreme Court of India in the K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) judgment recognized the right to privacy as a fundamental right protected under Article 21 of the Constitution.
2. The 2018 Srikrishna Committee Report on data protection suggested that the government maintain a centralized decryption key repository to assist law enforcement agencies in tracking terror-related communications.
3. Under the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, the government possesses the authority to intercept messages in the interest of public safety, a provision that was extended to digital data packets by the 2008 amendment to the Act.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as the nine-judge bench in the K.S. Puttaswamy (2017) case unanimously declared privacy a fundamental right under Article 21. Statement 2 is incorrect because the Srikrishna Committee Report actually cautioned against government-mandated backdoors or centralized decryption, emphasizing that encryption is essential for data security. Statement 3 is incorrect because the authority for digital interception is derived from Section 69 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, not the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885.
Consider the following statements regarding Privacy in the digital age and algorithmic bias:
1. The Justice A.P. Shah Committee report of 2012 on privacy suggested a framework for data protection in India, recommending the inclusion of sensitive personal data categories such as political affiliation and sexual orientation.
2. The Budapest Convention on Cybercrime, opened for signature in 2001, provides a legal framework for international cooperation on digital evidence, and India is a signatory to its provisions on cross-border data access.
3. The European Union's General Data Protection Regulation, which came into effect in May 2018, includes provisions regarding the 'right to explanation' for automated decision-making processes.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 3 is correct because Article 22 of the GDPR provides data subjects the right not to be subject to a decision based solely on automated processing, including profiling, which significantly affects them, implying a right to an explanation. Statement 1 is incorrect because while the Justice A.P. Shah Committee (2012) did propose a privacy framework, it was established by the Planning Commission, not as a formal legislative act, and its recommendations were distinct from the current DPDP Act framework. Statement 2 is incorrect because India is not a signatory to the Budapest Convention on Cybercrime, as the government has expressed concerns regarding the sovereignty implications of its provisions on cross-border data access.
Consider the following statements regarding Right to privacy as a facet of Article 21:
1. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, writing for the majority in the 2017 privacy verdict, noted that privacy is a natural right which inheres in every human being by virtue of their birth.
2. The nine-judge bench in the K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) judgment unanimously affirmed that the right to privacy is a fundamental right protected under Article 21 of the Constitution.
3. The Supreme Court in the M.P. Sharma v. Satish Chandra (1954) case had previously held that the right to privacy was not specifically guaranteed by the Constitution of India.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
In the landmark 2017 K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India judgment, a nine-judge bench unanimously declared the right to privacy a fundamental right under Article 21, with Justice D.Y. Chandrachud emphasizing it as a natural right inherent to human existence. This verdict explicitly overruled the 1954 M.P. Sharma v. Satish Chandra case, which had previously held that the Constitution did not specifically guarantee a right to privacy. Since all three statements accurately reflect the legal history and the constitutional evolution of privacy rights in India, all are correct.
Consider the following statements regarding Medical records and patient confidentiality:
1. The Clinical Establishments (Registration and Regulation) Act, 2010, provides for the maintenance of medical records and ensures the confidentiality of patient information during the period of treatment.
2. Under the Indian Medical Council (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations, 2002, a physician is permitted to disclose patient information to a third party only with the patient's consent or in cases where the law provides for such disclosure.
3. The Information Technology (Reasonable Security Practices and Procedures and Sensitive Personal Data or Information) Rules, 2011, defines health records as sensitive personal data and provides for the automatic transfer of such data to international research organizations.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as the Clinical Establishments (Registration and Regulation) Act, 2010, mandates that clinical establishments maintain and provide records to patients while ensuring confidentiality. Statement 2 is correct because the 2002 MCI Regulations explicitly prohibit physicians from disclosing patient secrets except with consent or under legal compulsion. Statement 3 is incorrect because while the IT Rules, 2011, classify health records as 'Sensitive Personal Data,' they strictly regulate data transfer and do not provide for the automatic transfer of such data to international research organizations.
Consider the following statements regarding Three-fold test for state interference:
1. The third prong, proportionality, ensures that the means adopted by the state are rationally connected to the objective and represent the least intrusive measure available.
2. The proportionality requirement draws its legal lineage from the 1954 M.P. Sharma judgment, which initially recognized the privacy of documents during police searches.
3. The second prong, the test of legitimate state aim, requires that the state action pursues a specific, identifiable goal that serves a broader public interest.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 1 and 3 are correct as they accurately define the proportionality and legitimate aim prongs established in the K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) judgment, which mandates that state interference must be backed by law, serve a legitimate goal, and be proportional to the objective. Statement 2 is incorrect because the M.P. Sharma (1954) judgment actually held that there is no fundamental right to privacy under the Indian Constitution, a view that was specifically overruled by the nine-judge bench in the 2017 Puttaswamy case.
Consider the following statements regarding Right to privacy in public spaces (CCTV surveillance):
1. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act of 2023 provides for the establishment of a Data Protection Board, and it grants the central government the power to exempt state agencies from the notice requirements regarding public surveillance.
2. The Supreme Court judgment in the Kharak Singh case (1962) established the 'reasonable expectation of privacy' test, which serves as the current standard for evaluating CCTV surveillance in public spaces.
3. The Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019, classifies CCTV footage as non-personal data, and it allows for the processing of such data by government agencies without the need for a data fiduciary.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because while the DPDP Act 2023 establishes the Data Protection Board, it does not provide blanket exemptions for state agencies from notice requirements for public surveillance. Statement 2 is incorrect because the 'reasonable expectation of privacy' test was established in the K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) judgment, whereas Kharak Singh (1962) originally held that privacy was not a fundamental right. Statement 3 is incorrect as CCTV footage containing identifiable individuals constitutes personal data under the Act, and the processing of such data by government agencies must still adhere to the legal framework governing data fiduciaries.
Consider the following statements regarding Right to be forgotten vs. freedom of speech:
1. In the case of Jorawer Singh Mundy v. Union of India (2021), the Delhi High Court acknowledged the concept of the right to be forgotten regarding the removal of past judicial records from online platforms.
2. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act of 2023 incorporates the right to be forgotten within its primary definitions, following the framework established by the 2017 Data Protection Authority of India guidelines.
3. The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) of the European Union, which came into effect in May 2018, formalizes the right to erasure under Article 17.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as the Delhi High Court in Jorawer Singh Mundy (2021) directed the removal of a judgment from search engines to protect the petitioner's right to be forgotten. Statement 3 is correct because Article 17 of the EU's GDPR, effective May 2018, explicitly codifies the 'right to erasure' or the right to be forgotten. Statement 2 is incorrect because while the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, provides for the 'right to erasure' under Section 12, it does not rely on any 2017 Data Protection Authority guidelines, as no such statutory authority existed at that time.
Consider the following statements regarding Biometric data collection and Aadhaar linkage:
1. The Supreme Court in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India (2017) declared the right to privacy as a fundamental right protected under Article 21 of the Constitution.
2. Section 7 of the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016, permits the use of Aadhaar for the receipt of subsidies funded from the Consolidated Fund of India.
3. The Data Protection Board of India, established under the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, oversees compliance regarding the processing of personal data, including biometric identifiers.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
Statement 1 is correct as the nine-judge bench in the 2017 Puttaswamy judgment unanimously affirmed that privacy is an intrinsic part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21. Statement 2 is correct because Section 7 of the Aadhaar Act mandates Aadhaar authentication for individuals seeking subsidies, benefits, or services funded directly from the Consolidated Fund of India. Statement 3 is correct as the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, establishes the Data Protection Board of India as the regulatory body responsible for monitoring compliance and adjudicating grievances related to the processing of personal data, including sensitive biometric information.
Consider the following statements regarding Data localization and sovereign control over data:
1. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, establishes the Data Protection Board of India as an adjudicatory body to oversee compliance and impose penalties for data breaches.
2. Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, empowers the Central Government to issue directions for blocking public access to information through any computer resource.
3. The Reserve Bank of India issued a circular in April 2018 directing payment system providers to ensure that entire data relating to payment systems is stored in a system only in India.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
Statement 1 is correct as the DPDP Act, 2023, mandates the establishment of the Data Protection Board of India to monitor compliance and adjudicate penalties. Statement 2 is correct because Section 69A of the IT Act, 2000, grants the government legal authority to block public access to information in the interest of sovereignty, integrity, and defense of India. Statement 3 is correct as the RBI's April 2018 circular mandated that all payment system data must be stored exclusively within India to ensure sovereign control and regulatory oversight, making all three statements accurate.
Consider the following statements regarding Privacy implications of contact tracing apps:
1. The Data Protection Authority of India, as proposed in the Digital Personal Data Protection Act 2023, is tasked with overseeing the processing of personal data by entities including digital health platforms.
2. The Aarogya Setu app, launched by the Government of India in April 2020, utilizes Bluetooth and GPS location data to facilitate contact tracing for COVID-19 management.
3. The Budapest Convention on Cybercrime, ratified by India in 2019, provides for the cross-border exchange of personal health data collected through mobile applications during global pandemics.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as the Digital Personal Data Protection Act (DPDP) 2023 establishes the Data Protection Board of India to oversee data processing compliance across all digital entities. Statement 2 is correct because the Aarogya Setu app, launched in April 2020, leverages Bluetooth for proximity detection and GPS for location tracking to identify potential COVID-19 exposure. Statement 3 is incorrect because India is not a signatory to the Budapest Convention on Cybercrime, and there is no such international mandate for the cross-border exchange of personal health data during pandemics.
Consider the following statements regarding Privacy implications of contact tracing apps:
1. The Justice B.N. Srikrishna Committee report of 2018 refers to the integration of biometric data into public health databases as a standard practice for enhancing the efficacy of state-led epidemic control measures.
2. The National Digital Health Mission, announced in August 2020, is associated with the creation of a centralized repository that links contact tracing app metadata with individual income tax records.
3. The Epidemic Diseases Act of 1897 encompasses specific clauses regarding the digital surveillance of citizens, which served as the primary legal basis for the deployment of the Aarogya Setu application.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
All three statements are incorrect because the Justice B.N. Srikrishna Committee report actually emphasized data minimization and cautioned against excessive surveillance rather than endorsing biometric integration for epidemic control. The National Digital Health Mission focuses on creating unique health IDs for medical records and does not link metadata with income tax records, while the Aarogya Setu app lacked a specific statutory basis under the colonial-era Epidemic Diseases Act of 1897, which contains no provisions for digital surveillance.
Consider the following statements regarding Three-fold test for state interference:
1. The nine-judge bench in the Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) judgment identified the three-fold test to determine the validity of state intrusion into individual privacy.
2. The first prong of the test, legality, necessitates the existence of a valid law to justify state encroachment upon the privacy of an individual.
3. The three-fold test originated from the 1978 Maneka Gandhi case, which established the necessity of a fair, just, and reasonable procedure for state action.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is incorrect.
In the 2017 Puttaswamy judgment, the nine-judge bench unanimously declared privacy a fundamental right under Article 21 and established the three-fold test (legality, legitimate state aim, and proportionality) to govern state interference. While the first prong correctly requires a valid law to justify encroachment, statement 3 is incorrect because the three-fold test was explicitly formulated in the Puttaswamy case itself, rather than originating from the 1978 Maneka Gandhi case, which established the 'procedure established by law' doctrine.
Consider the following statements regarding Encryption and national security concerns:
1. Section 69 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 empowers the Central Government or a State Government to issue directions for interception, monitoring, or decryption of any information generated, transmitted, received, or stored in any computer resource.
2. The draft Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2022 includes a clause that grants the Union Home Ministry the power to suspend encryption services for a period of up to six months during a declared national emergency.
3. The Supreme Court in the Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020) case established that the suspension of internet services is a valid exercise of power under the Information Technology Rules, 2009, provided it is reviewed by a high-level committee every 72 hours.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as Section 69 of the IT Act, 2000 grants the government broad powers for interception and decryption in the interest of sovereignty, integrity, and national security. Statement 2 is incorrect because the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (enacted) contains no such provision regarding the suspension of encryption services by the Home Ministry. Statement 3 is incorrect because, while the Anuradha Bhasin judgment ruled that internet suspension must be necessary, proportionate, and subject to periodic review, it did not mandate a 72-hour review cycle, and internet suspension is governed by the Temporary Suspension of Telecom Services (Public Emergency or Public Safety) Rules, 2017, not the 2009 IT Rules.
Consider the following statements regarding Data Protection Act and individual autonomy:
1. The Right to Information Act, 2005, includes provisions for the disclosure of personal information, and the 2023 Data Protection Act amends Section 8(1)(j) to permit the release of medical records without individual consent.
2. The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) of the European Union, which influenced several global privacy frameworks, became enforceable on May 25, 2018.
3. The Data Protection Board of India, established under the 2023 Act, functions as a body corporate with a chairperson and members appointed by the Central Government.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because while the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023, amends Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act to exempt all personal information from disclosure regardless of public interest, it does not specifically permit the release of medical records without consent. Statement 2 is correct as the EU's GDPR, a landmark regulation for data privacy, became enforceable on May 25, 2018. Statement 3 is correct because the DPDP Act mandates the establishment of the Data Protection Board of India as a body corporate, with its chairperson and members appointed by the Central Government.
Consider the following statements regarding State's duty to protect informational privacy:
1. Section 43A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, provides for compensation to individuals in cases where a body corporate fails to maintain reasonable security practices for sensitive personal data.
2. Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1948, recognizes the right of individuals to be protected against arbitrary interference with their privacy.
3. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, establishes the Data Protection Board of India as the regulatory body responsible for overseeing compliance with the provisions of the legislation.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
Statement 1 is correct as Section 43A of the IT Act, 2000, mandates corporate entities to implement reasonable security practices for sensitive personal data, failing which they are liable to pay compensation to affected persons. Statement 2 is correct because Article 12 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights explicitly enshrines the right of individuals to be free from arbitrary interference with their privacy, family, home, or correspondence. Statement 3 is correct as the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, establishes the Data Protection Board of India as an independent regulatory body tasked with monitoring compliance, conducting inquiries, and imposing penalties for data breaches.
Consider the following statements regarding Interception of electronic communication rules:
1. The Indian Telegraph Act of 1885 was amended in 2007 to incorporate provisions for digital data interception, and the 2009 Rules were subsequently notified under the supervision of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India.
2. The 2017 Puttaswamy judgment established the nine-judge bench criteria for data privacy, and the 2009 Interception Rules were updated in 2018 to include a mandatory prior judicial warrant for all surveillance requests.
3. The Information Technology Act of 2000 includes Section 69A which deals with the blocking of public access to information, and this section was invoked by the 2009 Interception Rules to establish the oversight role of the Judiciary.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
All statements are incorrect: Statement 1 is false because the 2009 Rules were notified by the Ministry of Communications and IT, not the TRAI. Statement 2 is incorrect as the Puttaswamy judgment was delivered by a nine-judge bench, but the 2009 Rules were not updated to mandate a prior judicial warrant for surveillance. Statement 3 is false because Section 69A of the IT Act deals with blocking public access to information, but the 2009 Rules (notified under Section 69) do not establish a judicial oversight mechanism, as surveillance remains an executive function.
Consider the following statements regarding Encryption and the Information Technology Act, 2000:
1. The 2018 amendments to the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Interception, Monitoring and Decryption of Information) Rules, 2009 expanded the scope of authorized agencies to include the Central Bureau of Investigation and the Intelligence Bureau.
2. The Budapest Convention on Cybercrime, which India signed in 2001, contains provisions regarding the preservation of stored computer data and serves as the primary international instrument governing encryption standards for domestic law enforcement.
3. The Information Technology Act, 2000 was enacted following the recommendations of the 1996 UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce, which provides the legal framework for the appointment of the Controller of Certifying Authorities.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because the 2009 Rules already empowered 10 central agencies, including the IB and CBI, to intercept and decrypt information; the 2018 notification did not expand the list of agencies but rather clarified the authorization process. Statement 2 is incorrect as India is not a signatory to the Budapest Convention on Cybercrime, citing concerns over sovereignty and the lack of a consultative process during its drafting. Statement 3 is incorrect because while the IT Act, 2000 was indeed based on the 1996 UNCITRAL Model Law, the Act itself does not contain specific provisions for encryption standards, and the Controller of Certifying Authorities is appointed under Section 17 of the Act to regulate digital signatures, not to govern encryption standards.
Consider the following statements regarding Privacy in the digital age and algorithmic bias:
1. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, introduces the office of the Data Protection Board of India, which functions as a digital-by-design body to handle grievances and data breaches.
2. The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, were notified under Section 69A of the IT Act, 2000, to provide a framework for grievance redressal in social media platforms.
3. In the 2017 Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India judgment, the Supreme Court held that the right to privacy is protected as an intrinsic part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as the DPDP Act, 2023, establishes the Data Protection Board of India to adjudicate on data breaches and grievances through a digital-by-design framework. Statement 3 is correct because the 2017 Puttaswamy judgment unanimously declared privacy a fundamental right under Article 21. Statement 2 is incorrect because the IT Rules, 2021, were notified under Section 87 of the IT Act, 2000, whereas Section 69A pertains specifically to the power to issue directions for blocking public access to information.
Consider the following statements regarding Data Protection Act and individual autonomy:
1. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, defines a data fiduciary as any person who determines the purpose and means of processing personal data.
2. The Supreme Court in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) declared the right to privacy as a fundamental right protected under Article 21 of the Constitution.
3. The Information Technology (Reasonable Security Practices and Procedures) Rules, 2011, apply to government agencies and private entities alike, and were notified under the authority of the Data Protection Act, 2023.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as Section 2(i) of the DPDP Act, 2023, defines a 'Data Fiduciary' as any person who determines the purpose and means of processing personal data. Statement 2 is correct because the landmark nine-judge bench verdict in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) unanimously affirmed that the right to privacy is an intrinsic part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21. Statement 3 is incorrect because the IT Rules, 2011, were notified under the Information Technology Act, 2000, and specifically apply to 'body corporates' rather than government agencies, which are governed by separate guidelines.
Consider the following statements regarding Data localization and sovereign control over data:
1. The Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019, introduced the concept of 'critical personal data' which carries a requirement for storage and processing within the territorial boundaries of India.
2. The Srikrishna Committee Report of 2018 recommended the establishment of a Data Protection Authority under the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology to oversee international data transfers.
3. The Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) judgment recognized the right to privacy as a fundamental right protected under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as the 2019 Bill mandated that 'critical personal data' must be stored and processed exclusively within India. Statement 3 is correct because the landmark 2017 Puttaswamy judgment unanimously declared privacy a fundamental right under Article 21. Statement 2 is incorrect because, while the Srikrishna Committee did recommend a Data Protection Authority, it proposed that the body be an independent statutory regulator, not one placed under the administrative control of the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology.
Consider the following statements regarding Interception of electronic communication rules:
1. The Supreme Court of India in the K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) judgment recognized the right to privacy as a fundamental right protected under Article 21 of the Constitution.
2. Rule 22 of the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Interception, Monitoring and Decryption of Information) Rules, 2009, provides for the maintenance of records by the designated security agencies.
3. The Indian Telegraph Act of 1885 serves as the primary legislative framework under which the 2009 Interception Rules were notified by the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
All three statements are correct: the 2017 K.S. Puttaswamy judgment established the right to privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21, while Rule 22 of the 2009 IT Rules mandates that designated agencies maintain detailed records of intercepted communications to ensure accountability. Furthermore, the 2009 Interception Rules were framed by the Central Government under Section 69(2) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, which derives its regulatory authority and procedural framework from the foundational principles established in the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885.
Consider the following statements regarding Data Protection Act and individual autonomy:
1. Section 43A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, introduced the concept of compensation for failure to protect sensitive personal data or information.
2. The Srikrishna Committee report, submitted in July 2018, recommended the establishment of a Data Protection Authority and proposed that the processing of non-personal data falls under the jurisdiction of the 2023 Act.
3. The Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016, provides for the authentication of identity, and its provisions regarding data storage were incorporated into the 2023 Act as a primary schedule.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as Section 43A of the IT Act, 2000, mandates compensation for corporate bodies failing to implement reasonable security practices for sensitive personal data. Statement 2 is incorrect because while the Srikrishna Committee recommended a Data Protection Authority, the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023, specifically excludes non-personal data from its scope. Statement 3 is incorrect because the DPDP Act, 2023, does not incorporate the Aadhaar Act's data storage provisions as a primary schedule; rather, the DPDP Act operates independently while maintaining specific provisions for Aadhaar authentication under its own regulatory framework.
Consider the following statements regarding Right to be forgotten vs. freedom of speech:
1. The Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019, introduced in the Lok Sabha, contained specific provisions under Section 20 regarding the right of data principals to restrict or prevent continuing disclosure of personal data.
2. The European Court of Justice ruling in Google Spain SL v. AEPD (2014) established that search engine operators are responsible for the processing of personal data that appears on web pages published by third parties.
3. The Justice B.N. Srikrishna Committee report submitted in 2018 recommended that the right to be forgotten should be subject to a proportionality test balancing privacy against the public interest in information.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
All three statements are correct: Section 20 of the Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019, explicitly codified the 'Right to be Forgotten' for data principals; the 2014 Google Spain ruling landmarked the liability of search engines as data controllers for third-party content; and the 2018 Justice B.N. Srikrishna Committee report emphasized that this right must be balanced against the public's right to information through a proportionality test. Since all provided statements accurately reflect the legal and committee-based evolution of data privacy in India and Europe, there are no incorrect statements.
Consider the following statements regarding Reproductive autonomy and bodily integrity:
1. The National Population Policy of 2000 encompasses a strategy for stabilizing population growth and provides for the inclusion of abortion services as a primary method of contraception within the public health infrastructure.
2. The Supreme Court of India in the K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) judgment recognized reproductive autonomy as a core component of the fundamental right to privacy under Article 21.
3. The Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques Act, 1994, provides for the regulation of genetic counseling centers and includes provisions for the legal termination of pregnancy based on sex-selection criteria in specific medical emergencies.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 2 is correct as the K.S. Puttaswamy (2017) judgment explicitly held that the right to privacy, including reproductive autonomy and bodily integrity, is protected under Article 21. Statement 1 is incorrect because the National Population Policy (2000) focuses on stabilization through voluntary informed choice and does not designate abortion as a primary method of contraception. Statement 3 is incorrect because the PCPNDT Act, 1994, strictly prohibits sex-selection and sex-determination, and it does not permit termination of pregnancy based on sex-selection under any circumstances.
Consider the following statements regarding Sexual orientation and the decriminalization of Section 377:
1. Justice Indu Malhotra, while concurring with the 2018 verdict, noted that history owes an apology to the members of the LGBTQ+ community for the delay in providing redressal for the ignominy and ostracism they suffered.
2. International human rights frameworks, such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, were incorporated into domestic law through the 2018 ruling, which established a new constitutional definition of marriage.
3. The decriminalization process under Navtej Singh Johar involved the repeal of the entire Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, including the provisions pertaining to non-consensual sexual acts and bestiality.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as Justice Indu Malhotra famously remarked that history owes an apology to the LGBTQ+ community for their long-standing ostracism. Statement 2 is incorrect because the 2018 Navtej Singh Johar judgment decriminalized consensual same-sex acts but did not establish a constitutional definition of marriage, which remains a subject of ongoing legal debate. Statement 3 is incorrect because the Supreme Court only struck down Section 377 insofar as it criminalized consensual sexual acts between adults; the provision remains in force for non-consensual acts and bestiality.
Consider the following statements regarding Sexual orientation and the decriminalization of Section 377:
1. The Naz Foundation v. NCT of Delhi case in 2009 resulted in the Supreme Court striking down Section 377, a decision that remained the governing law until the 2013 Suresh Kumar Koushal verdict.
2. The 2017 Puttaswamy judgment affirmed that the right to privacy is an extension of the freedom of speech under Article 19, and this reasoning formed the primary basis for the subsequent decriminalization of same-sex relations.
3. Article 14 of the Constitution guarantees equality before the law, and the 2018 judgment utilized this provision to invalidate Section 377 on the grounds that it created a classification based on gender rather than sexual orientation.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because the 2009 Naz Foundation verdict was overturned by the 2013 Suresh Kumar Koushal judgment, not the other way around. Statement 2 is incorrect because the 2017 Puttaswamy judgment established privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty), not Article 19. Statement 3 is incorrect because the 2018 Navtej Singh Johar judgment invalidated Section 377 on the grounds that it violated Articles 14, 15, 19, and 21, specifically noting that the classification was based on sexual orientation, which is a natural characteristic, rather than gender.
Consider the following statements regarding Privacy of prisoners and undertrials:
1. In the 2017 K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India judgment, the Supreme Court held that the right to privacy is a fundamental right protected under Article 21 of the Constitution.
2. The Delhi High Court in the 2021 case of Amandeep Singh v. State observed that the right to privacy of a prisoner includes the right to protect one's image from being circulated without consent.
3. Rule 558 of the Prisons Act, 1894, provides for the maintenance of a history ticket for every prisoner, which includes medical records and personal details kept under administrative supervision.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
Statement 1 is correct as the nine-judge bench in K.S. Puttaswamy (2017) unanimously declared privacy an intrinsic part of Article 21. Statement 2 is correct because the Delhi High Court in Amandeep Singh v. State (2021) affirmed that prisoners retain the right to privacy, specifically prohibiting the unauthorized circulation of their photographs. Statement 3 is correct as Rule 558 of the Prisons Act, 1894, mandates the maintenance of a 'history ticket' for every prisoner, which serves as an official record of their medical history and personal administrative details.
Consider the following statements regarding State's duty to protect informational privacy:
1. The Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019, was reviewed by a Joint Committee of Parliament, which recommended the inclusion of non-personal data within the regulatory framework of the proposed data protection legislation.
2. The Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, serves as the primary legal instrument for regulating digital data flows, and its 2017 amendment introduced specific clauses regarding the encryption standards for private messaging applications.
3. The Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016, includes provisions that allow the Unique Identification Authority of India to share core biometric information with private sector entities for commercial verification purposes.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because the Joint Committee on the Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019, recommended including non-personal data within the scope of the bill, but the bill was eventually withdrawn in 2022 and replaced by the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, which excludes non-personal data. Statement 2 is incorrect as the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, primarily governs telecommunications infrastructure and interception, and there was no 2017 amendment specifically mandating encryption standards for private messaging. Statement 3 is incorrect because Section 29 of the Aadhaar Act, 2016, explicitly prohibits the sharing of core biometric information for any purpose, and the Act restricts the use of Aadhaar data to authentication for subsidies and benefits, not for commercial verification by private entities.
Consider the following statements regarding Reproductive autonomy and bodily integrity:
1. The 2022 Supreme Court ruling in the X v. Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department case expanded the scope of the MTP Act to include unmarried women within the definition of those eligible for abortion up to 24 weeks.
2. The MTP Act, 1971, was originally enacted to reduce the incidence of illegal abortion and consequent maternal mortality and morbidity, providing a legal framework for pregnancy termination.
3. The International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) held in Cairo in 1994 emphasized that reproductive health includes the right to make decisions concerning reproduction free of discrimination, coercion, and violence.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
Statement 1 is correct because the Supreme Court in X v. Principal Secretary (2022) ruled that the distinction between married and unmarried women under the MTP Rules is artificial and unconstitutional, extending abortion access up to 24 weeks to all women. Statement 2 is correct as the MTP Act, 1971, was specifically introduced to provide a safe, legal framework to curb high maternal mortality rates caused by unsafe, clandestine abortions. Statement 3 is correct because the 1994 Cairo ICPD Programme of Action shifted the global discourse from population control to a rights-based approach, explicitly recognizing reproductive health as a fundamental human right free from coercion and discrimination.
Consider the following statements regarding Surveillance and the Telegraph Act, 1885:
1. The Indian Telegraph (Amendment) Rules, 2017, revised the surveillance framework, and it allows private telecom service providers to monitor subscriber metadata for commercial analysis without prior government notification.
2. The Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, includes provisions for the licensing of wireless equipment, and it grants the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India the power to intercept private communications for national security purposes.
3. The 1923 Official Secrets Act is often read alongside the Telegraph Act, and it provides for the decryption of encrypted communication channels by the Intelligence Bureau without judicial oversight.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because surveillance is strictly governed by Section 5(2) of the Telegraph Act, which mandates government authorization, and private providers cannot monitor data for commercial purposes without compliance with data protection laws. Statement 2 is incorrect as the power to intercept communications under Section 5(2) is vested solely in the Central or State government, not the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), which is a statutory regulator. Statement 3 is incorrect because the Telegraph Act and the Information Technology Act, 2000, govern interception and decryption, and while the Intelligence Bureau conducts operations, these are subject to executive oversight protocols rather than the Official Secrets Act, 1923, which primarily deals with espionage and sensitive state information.
Consider the following statements regarding Right to privacy as a facet of Article 21:
1. The Kharak Singh v. State of U.P. (1962) judgment observed that the regulation of domiciliary visits by police was an infringement on the personal liberty of an individual under Article 21.
2. The 2017 privacy judgment overruled the legal reasoning provided in the ADM Jabalpur v. Shiv Kant Shukla (1976) case regarding the suspension of fundamental rights during an emergency.
3. Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which India is a signatory to, provides that no one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with their privacy, family, home, or correspondence.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
Statement 1 is correct as the Supreme Court in Kharak Singh (1962) held that domiciliary visits infringe upon personal liberty, though it did not explicitly recognize privacy as a fundamental right. Statement 2 is correct because the 2017 K.S. Puttaswamy judgment explicitly overruled the ADM Jabalpur (1976) verdict, which had infamously held that fundamental rights could be suspended during an Emergency. Statement 3 is correct as Article 12 of the UDHR (1948) establishes the international standard for privacy, and India, as a signatory, aligns its constitutional interpretation of Article 21 with these global human rights principles.
Consider the following statements regarding Encryption and the Information Technology Act, 2000:
1. The Data Protection Board, as proposed in the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, functions as an independent regulatory body tasked with adjudicating disputes between data principals and data fiduciaries regarding the use of end-to-end encryption.
2. The Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015) judgment struck down Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and established a judicial oversight mechanism for all government requests involving the decryption of private electronic communications.
3. Section 84A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 authorizes the Central Government to prescribe the modes or methods for encryption, and the government notified the first set of technical encryption standards under this section in 2015.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because the Data Protection Board's mandate under the DPDP Act, 2023 is to address personal data breaches and non-compliance, not to adjudicate disputes specifically regarding the use of end-to-end encryption. Statement 2 is incorrect because while Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015) struck down Section 66A for being unconstitutionally vague, it did not establish a judicial oversight mechanism for decryption requests, which remain governed by the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Interception, Monitoring and Decryption of Information) Rules, 2009. Statement 3 is incorrect because although Section 84A empowers the Central Government to prescribe encryption modes, no such technical encryption standards have been notified by the government to date.
Consider the following statements regarding Encryption and the Information Technology Act, 2000:
1. The Supreme Court of India in the Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India (2017) judgment recognized the right to privacy as a fundamental right protected under Article 21 of the Constitution.
2. The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 introduced a requirement for significant social media intermediaries to enable the identification of the first originator of information for the purposes of prevention, detection, or investigation of specified offenses.
3. Section 69 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 empowers the Central Government or a State Government to issue directions for the interception, monitoring, or decryption of any information generated, transmitted, received, or stored in any computer resource.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
All three statements are correct: the 2017 Puttaswamy judgment established privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21, while the 2021 IT Rules mandate that significant social media intermediaries must identify the 'first originator' of information to aid law enforcement in investigating serious offenses. Furthermore, Section 69 of the IT Act, 2000, provides the legal framework for the government to intercept, monitor, or decrypt data in the interest of sovereignty, integrity, and public order.
Consider the following statements regarding K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) judgment:
1. The petitioner, K.S. Puttaswamy, was a retired High Court judge who initiated the challenge in 2012 specifically to contest the collection of biometric data under the National Population Register.
2. The judgment overruled the 1954 M.P. Sharma case and the 1962 Kharak Singh case to the extent that they held privacy was not a protected interest under the Constitution.
3. The judgment established a three-fold test for state interference, which includes the existence of a valid law, a legitimate state aim, and a requirement for proportionality as defined in the 1978 Maneka Gandhi ruling.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 2 is correct because the nine-judge bench explicitly overruled the M.P. Sharma and Kharak Singh verdicts, declaring privacy an intrinsic part of the Right to Life and Personal Liberty under Article 21. Statement 1 is incorrect because the challenge was primarily against the mandatory collection of biometric data under the Aadhaar scheme, not the National Population Register. Statement 3 is incorrect because, while the judgment established a three-fold test (legality, legitimate aim, and proportionality), the proportionality standard was derived from the Puttaswamy judgment itself rather than being directly defined in the 1978 Maneka Gandhi ruling.
Consider the following statements regarding Privacy implications of contact tracing apps:
1. The European Union's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) includes provisions that allow member states to bypass user consent protocols for decentralized contact tracing apps during public health emergencies.
2. The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules 2021 provide for the establishment of a national registry of contact tracing data managed by the Ministry of Home Affairs.
3. The Supreme Court of India in the K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) judgment recognized the right to privacy as a fundamental right protected under Article 21 of the Constitution.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 3 is correct because the landmark 2017 K.S. Puttaswamy judgment established the right to privacy as an intrinsic part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21. Statement 1 is incorrect because the GDPR mandates strict data protection standards and does not permit bypassing consent protocols; instead, it emphasizes data minimization and purpose limitation even during emergencies. Statement 2 is incorrect because the IT Rules 2021 focus on intermediary due diligence and grievance redressal mechanisms, and there is no provision within these rules for a national registry of contact tracing data managed by the Ministry of Home Affairs.
Consider the following statements regarding Right to privacy as a facet of Article 21:
1. The Information Technology Act of 2000 includes provisions for data protection, and the Supreme Court in the 2017 privacy case integrated the European Union's GDPR standards into the Indian legal framework to regulate corporate data usage.
2. The Aadhar Act of 2016 was challenged before a five-judge Constitution bench, which held that the collection of biometric data is a violation of the right to privacy as defined in the 1954 M.P. Sharma ruling.
3. The Indian Telegraph Act of 1885 provides the legal framework for interception of communications, and the 2017 Puttaswamy judgment declared Section 5(2) of this Act unconstitutional for failing to protect personal data.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because the 2017 K.S. Puttaswamy judgment did not integrate GDPR into Indian law; India's data protection framework is governed by the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023. Statement 2 is incorrect as the Supreme Court upheld the Aadhaar Act in 2018, ruling that biometric collection is a reasonable restriction, and it explicitly overruled the M.P. Sharma judgment which had previously held that privacy was not a fundamental right. Statement 3 is incorrect because the Puttaswamy judgment did not declare Section 5(2) of the Indian Telegraph Act unconstitutional; rather, it established the 'three-fold test' (legality, need, and proportionality) that any state action, including surveillance, must satisfy to infringe upon the right to privacy.
Consider the following statements regarding Interception of electronic communication rules:
1. The 2009 Interception Rules specify that interception orders issued by the competent authority remain valid for a period not exceeding 60 days unless renewed.
2. The Review Committee constituted under Rule 419A of the Indian Telegraph Rules, 1951, is chaired by the Cabinet Secretary at the level of the Central Government.
3. Section 69 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, empowers the Central Government or a State Government to issue directions for the interception of information transmitted through any computer resource.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
Statement 1 is correct as Rule 14 of the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Interception, Monitoring and Decryption of Information) Rules, 2009, mandates that interception orders expire after 60 days unless renewed, with a maximum limit of 180 days. Statement 2 is correct because Rule 419A of the Indian Telegraph Rules, 1951, mandates that the Review Committee at the Central level must be chaired by the Cabinet Secretary to ensure oversight of interception orders. Statement 3 is correct as Section 69 of the IT Act, 2000, provides the legal framework for both Central and State governments to intercept, monitor, or decrypt information through computer resources in the interest of sovereignty, integrity, and public order.
Consider the following statements regarding Three-fold test for state interference:
1. The test of legitimate state aim mirrors the criteria set forth in the 1967 Kharak Singh verdict, which evaluated the constitutionality of police surveillance on domiciles.
2. The Supreme Court in the 2017 ruling clarified that the right to privacy is an intrinsic part of Article 21, which guarantees the protection of life and personal liberty.
3. The legality prong of the privacy test incorporates the doctrine of 'due process of law' as defined in the 1950 A.K. Gopalan case regarding preventive detention.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 2 is correct as the 2017 K.S. Puttaswamy judgment unanimously declared privacy a fundamental right under Article 21. Statement 1 is incorrect because the three-fold test (legality, legitimate aim, and proportionality) was established in the Puttaswamy verdict to replace the narrow view of the 1967 Kharak Singh case, which had held that privacy was not a guaranteed right. Statement 3 is incorrect because the legality prong requires the existence of a valid law, whereas the A.K. Gopalan case (1950) adopted the 'procedure established by law' standard, which was later expanded to 'due process' following the Maneka Gandhi (1978) judgment.
Consider the following statements regarding Privacy of prisoners and undertrials:
1. The Prisons Act of 1894 was amended in 2022 to include provisions for digital surveillance of undertrials, which the Supreme Court upheld in the case of State of Maharashtra v. Public Interest Litigation Committee.
2. The Model Prison Manual of 2016 provides for the installation of biometric sensors in all high-security zones, and the Ministry of Home Affairs issued a circular in 2019 granting jail superintendents the power to share these data points with private security firms.
3. The Identification of Prisoners Act, 1920, allows for the collection of biological samples, and the 2022 Criminal Procedure (Identification) Act expanded this scope to include iris scans and behavioral attributes as defined under the Information Technology Act, 2000.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
All three statements are incorrect because the Prisons Act of 1894 has not been amended in 2022 to include digital surveillance, and no such Supreme Court judgment exists. The Model Prison Manual 2016 does not authorize the sharing of biometric data with private security firms, and such a circular by the Ministry of Home Affairs is non-existent. Finally, while the Criminal Procedure (Identification) Act, 2022 replaced the 1920 Act, it does not include 'behavioral attributes' as a category for collection, but rather focuses on physical and biological measurements like iris and retina scans.
Consider the following statements regarding Privacy in the digital age and algorithmic bias:
1. The Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016, allows for the collection of biometric data, and the Supreme Court in the 2018 Aadhaar verdict upheld its constitutional validity for all private sector banking transactions.
2. Algorithmic bias refers to systematic errors in computer systems that create unfair outcomes, a concept addressed by the OECD AI Principles adopted in 2019 to promote human-centric development of artificial intelligence.
3. The Srikrishna Committee report submitted in 2018 proposed the establishment of a Data Protection Authority, which was later incorporated into the Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019, before it was withdrawn in 2022.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because the Supreme Court in the 2018 Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India verdict struck down Section 57 of the Aadhaar Act, ruling that private entities cannot mandate Aadhaar authentication for banking or telecom services. Statement 2 is incorrect because while the OECD AI Principles (2019) do address fairness and bias, the definition of algorithmic bias is not restricted to 'systematic errors' but also encompasses outcomes that perpetuate social discrimination or historical prejudices through data. Statement 3 is incorrect because, although the Srikrishna Committee proposed a Data Protection Authority, the subsequent Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, replaced this concept with a 'Data Protection Board of India' rather than the authority originally envisioned in the withdrawn 2019 Bill.
Consider the following statements regarding Privacy in the context of matrimonial litigation:
1. Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, allows for divorce by mutual consent and incorporates a mandatory cooling-off period of 12 months that was introduced by the 1976 Amendment.
2. The Supreme Court in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India (2017) recognized the right to privacy as an intrinsic part of Article 21 of the Constitution.
3. Section 14 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, permits the court to receive evidence that may not be admissible under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, to facilitate the resolution of matrimonial disputes.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because the mandatory cooling-off period under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, is 6 months, not 12 months, and the Supreme Court in 'Amardeep Singh v. Harveen Kaur' (2017) ruled that this period can be waived in exceptional cases. Statement 2 is correct as the nine-judge bench in the 'Puttaswamy' judgment unanimously declared the right to privacy a fundamental right protected under Article 21. Statement 3 is correct because Section 14 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, provides a flexible evidentiary framework, allowing courts to consider any report, statement, or document that assists in effectively dealing with a dispute, regardless of its strict admissibility under the Indian Evidence Act.
Consider the following statements regarding Encryption and national security concerns:
1. The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 were notified under Section 79 of the IT Act, which focuses on the safe harbour protection for social media platforms regarding end-to-end encryption.
2. The Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019, as recommended by the Joint Parliamentary Committee, proposed the establishment of a Data Protection Authority of India with the power to override encryption standards for national security purposes.
3. The Budapest Convention on Cybercrime, which India signed in 2001, provides a legal framework for international cooperation on electronic evidence and allows for the decryption of private communications during criminal investigations.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because the IT Rules 2021 were notified under Section 87 of the IT Act, not Section 79, which deals with intermediary liability. Statement 2 is incorrect as the JPC report on the Data Protection Bill, 2019, did not grant the Data Protection Authority power to override encryption, but rather emphasized data sovereignty and security protocols. Statement 3 is incorrect because India is not a signatory to the Budapest Convention, having consistently declined to join due to concerns over provisions that allow foreign agencies to access data without mutual legal assistance.
Consider the following statements regarding Right to privacy in public spaces (CCTV surveillance):
1. The Information Technology (Reasonable Security Practices and Procedures and Sensitive Personal Data or Information) Rules, 2011, apply to corporate bodies handling sensitive personal data within the territorial jurisdiction of India.
2. The Supreme Court of India in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India (2017) recognized the right to privacy as a fundamental right protected under Article 21 of the Constitution.
3. Section 69 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, provides the legal framework for the government to intercept, monitor, or decrypt information stored in any computer resource for the sovereignty and integrity of India.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
Statement 1 is correct as the 2011 IT Rules mandate that corporate entities collecting sensitive personal data must implement reasonable security practices. Statement 2 is correct because the landmark 2017 Puttaswamy judgment unanimously declared privacy a fundamental right under Article 21, emphasizing that any state interference must be backed by law, serve a legitimate aim, and be proportionate. Statement 3 is correct as Section 69 of the IT Act, 2000, empowers the government to intercept or monitor digital information in the interest of India's sovereignty, integrity, defense, and public order.
Consider the following statements regarding Medical records and patient confidentiality:
1. The Mental Healthcare Act, 2017, includes provisions that grant every person with mental illness the right to confidentiality in respect of their mental health, mental healthcare, and treatment.
2. The Right to Information Act, 2005, includes a specific clause under Section 8(1)(j) that permits the disclosure of medical records of public servants if the information is held by a government hospital, regardless of the personal nature of the data.
3. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, classifies health data as personal data and places obligations on data fiduciaries to implement reasonable security safeguards to prevent personal data breaches.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as Section 23 of the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017, explicitly mandates confidentiality regarding a person's mental health and treatment. Statement 3 is correct because the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, defines health data as personal data and mandates that data fiduciaries implement robust security measures to prevent breaches. Statement 2 is incorrect because Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005, provides an exemption for personal information that has no relationship to any public activity or interest, and medical records are generally protected under this privacy clause even for public servants unless a larger public interest is proven.
Consider the following statements regarding Right to privacy in public spaces (CCTV surveillance):
1. The Justice B.N. Srikrishna Committee report submitted in 2018 suggests that facial recognition technology used by law enforcement agencies falls under the purview of the 2000 IT Act amendments.
2. The Data Protection Act of 2019 establishes the Data Protection Authority of India and grants it the power to regulate CCTV surveillance in private residential complexes.
3. The Indian Telegraph Act of 1885 includes provisions for the interception of digital communications, and the 2017 amendment extended these powers to cover real-time video surveillance in public squares.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
All three statements are incorrect because the Justice B.N. Srikrishna Committee report (2018) focused on a comprehensive data protection framework rather than specifically categorizing facial recognition under the IT Act, and the Data Protection Bill of 2019 was withdrawn by the government in 2022, never becoming an Act. Furthermore, the Indian Telegraph Act of 1885 governs the interception of telephonic communications and does not contain provisions extending its scope to real-time video surveillance in public squares.
Consider the following statements regarding State's duty to protect informational privacy:
1. The Information Technology (Reasonable Security Practices and Procedures and Sensitive Personal Data or Information) Rules, 2011, apply to all government agencies and private entities regardless of their location within the territory of India.
2. The Supreme Court of India in the K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) judgment identified informational privacy as a facet of the right to privacy under Article 21.
3. The Justice B.N. Srikrishna Committee submitted its report on data protection in 2018, which proposed the establishment of a Data Protection Authority under the direct administrative control of the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 2 is correct as the nine-judge bench in K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) unanimously affirmed that informational privacy is an intrinsic part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21. Statement 1 is incorrect because the 2011 IT Rules specifically apply only to 'bodies corporate' and persons located in India, explicitly excluding government agencies from their scope. Statement 3 is incorrect because the Srikrishna Committee recommended that the Data Protection Authority function as an independent statutory body to ensure regulatory autonomy, rather than being under the direct administrative control of the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology.
Consider the following statements regarding Privacy in the context of matrimonial litigation:
1. The Delhi High Court in X v. Y (2019) held that the right to privacy in matrimonial litigation extends to the protection of medical records and sensitive personal information of the spouses.
2. Under Section 22 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, proceedings are conducted in camera if either party desires, restricting the publication of accounts of such proceedings.
3. Order XXXII-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, provides for the settlement of family disputes through procedures that prioritize the privacy of the parties involved.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
Statement 1 is correct as the Delhi High Court in X v. Y (2019) emphasized that the right to privacy under Article 21 protects sensitive medical data in matrimonial disputes; Statement 2 is correct because Section 22 of the Hindu Marriage Act mandates in-camera proceedings and prohibits the publication of such proceedings without court permission; Statement 3 is correct as Order XXXII-A of the CPC, introduced by the 1976 amendment, specifically mandates that family court proceedings be held in camera and encourages settlements to protect the privacy and dignity of the parties involved.
Consider the following statements regarding Medical records and patient confidentiality:
1. The Indian Evidence Act, 1872, contains provisions under Section 126 that protect communication between a patient and a doctor, and this protection extends to all criminal proceedings regardless of the nature of the evidence.
2. The Supreme Court in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India (2017) recognized the right to privacy as a fundamental right protected under Article 21 of the Constitution.
3. The National Health Policy, 2017, proposes the establishment of a National Health Stack, which functions as a centralized repository for electronic health records accessible to any registered medical practitioner in the country.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 2 is correct as the nine-judge bench in the 2017 Puttaswamy judgment unanimously affirmed that the right to privacy is an intrinsic part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21. Statement 1 is incorrect because Section 126 of the Indian Evidence Act applies specifically to professional communications between attorneys and clients, not doctors and patients. Statement 3 is incorrect because, while the National Health Policy 2017 advocates for digital health, the 'National Health Stack' is a framework for a digital health ecosystem rather than a centralized repository granting universal access to any practitioner without patient consent or privacy safeguards.
Consider the following statements regarding Privacy of prisoners and undertrials:
1. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which India ratified in 1979, contains Article 17, which protects individuals against arbitrary or unlawful interference with their privacy.
2. The Supreme Court in the 1978 Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India case established the 'triple test' for privacy, which is currently applied by the National Human Rights Commission to assess the conditions of solitary confinement in district jails.
3. Article 20(3) of the Constitution protects a person from being a witness against himself, and the 1997 D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal judgment extended this protection to prohibit the collection of DNA samples from undertrials without a magistrate's order.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as India ratified the ICCPR in 1979, and Article 17 explicitly mandates protection against arbitrary interference with privacy. Statement 2 is incorrect because the 'triple test' (legality, need, and proportionality) for privacy was established in the 2017 K.S. Puttaswamy judgment, not the 1978 Maneka Gandhi case. Statement 3 is incorrect because, while D.K. Basu guidelines govern custodial arrests, the collection of biological samples is primarily regulated by the Criminal Procedure (Identification) Act, 2022, and the Supreme Court has not established a blanket prohibition on DNA collection without a magistrate's order under Article 20(3).
Consider the following statements regarding K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) judgment:
1. The final order directed the immediate suspension of the Aadhaar Act, 2016, citing that the collection of demographic data violated the reasonable expectation of privacy established in the 2017 ruling.
2. The court observed that the right to privacy is an absolute right, similar to the freedom of speech, and is derived from the Directive Principles of State Policy in Part IV of the Constitution.
3. During the proceedings, the Union government argued that the right to privacy was recognized as a fundamental right in the 1960s, but the court chose to limit its scope to bodily integrity alone.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
All three statements are incorrect because the 2017 judgment did not strike down the Aadhaar Act, but rather upheld it with some restrictions; it established that the right to privacy is a fundamental right under Article 21, not Part IV, and is subject to reasonable restrictions rather than being absolute. Furthermore, the Union government actually argued that the Constitution does not explicitly guarantee a fundamental right to privacy, and the Supreme Court rejected the narrow view of bodily integrity, instead defining privacy as a multifaceted right encompassing informational, decisional, and spatial autonomy.