Supreme Court to Examine Digital Personal Data Protection Act's Constitutional Validity Amid RTI Concerns

Indian Express - Explained · 17 Feb 2026 · 2 min read
Prelims · Polity Mains · GS2 Polity and constitution High relevance

The Supreme Court has admitted PILs challenging the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, citing its potential to undermine RTI rights and expand state surveillance, with hearings scheduled before a Constitution Bench in March.

Key points

Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 faces constitutional challenges from NCPRI, transparency advocate Venkatesh Nayak, and The Reporters’ Collective Trust, who argue it weakens RTI provisions and press freedom.

Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act amends Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, removing the 'public interest override' clause, which previously allowed disclosure of personal information if justified by larger public interest.

The petitioners contend that the amendment creates an absolute bar on disclosing personal information, potentially shielding corrupt officials and undermining participatory democracy.

[GS2-Polity] The petitions invoke the Puttaswamy judgment, arguing the DPDP Act fails the proportionality test by not adopting the least restrictive measure to balance privacy and transparency.

Investigative journalism is impacted as journalists may be classified as 'data fiduciaries', requiring consent from individuals under investigation, which is impractical for exposing corruption.

Section 36 of the DPDP Act empowers the government to demand information from data fiduciaries without consent, raising concerns about unchecked surveillance and chilling effects on whistleblowers.

[GS3-Security] The Act's penalties up to ₹250 crore could deter journalists from reporting on public interest issues involving personal data, stifling press freedom.

The Supreme Court's decision to hear the case by a Constitution Bench underscores the significant constitutional questions raised about fundamental rights and state power.

Way Forward: The government should reintroduce the public interest override in RTI amendments, establish safeguards against surveillance abuse under Section 36, and create specific exemptions for journalistic activities to balance privacy and transparency.

Key terms

Right to Information Act, 2005

A transparency law empowering citizens to access information from public authorities. Section 8(1)(j) previously balanced privacy and public interest, but the DPDP Act's amendment removes this balance, potentially weakening accountability mechanisms essential for democratic governance.

Puttaswamy Judgment (2017)

The Supreme Court's landmark ruling recognizing privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21. It established the 'proportionality test' for state restrictions on rights, requiring legitimate aim, least restrictive measures, and safeguards against abuse—a standard challenged in the DPDP Act case.

Constitution Bench

A Supreme Court bench of five or more judges constituted to decide substantial questions of constitutional interpretation. Its involvement signals the case's importance in defining the scope of privacy, transparency, and state power under the Indian Constitution.

Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023

Enacted to safeguard digital privacy, the DPDP Act regulates processing of personal data in India. Its constitutional challenge highlights tensions between privacy rights under Article 21 and transparency mandates of the RTI Act, raising critical questions about state surveillance and fundamental rights.