right to privacy

A DoorDash driver faces felony charges for unlawful surveillance and misdemeanor for sharing a video of a customer inside his home. The driver claimed she felt unsafe, but authorities found no crime committed by the customer. The incident sparked a debate on safety versus privacy, leading to the driver's arrest and job loss.

A viral video of a fan grabbing cricketer Abhishek Sharma's hand sparked a debate on fan culture in India. This incident, along with others involving Bollywood stars like Shah Rukh Khan and Deepika Padukone, highlights how intense admiration can sometimes cross personal boundaries, raising questions about celebrity privacy and consent.

Dr Bomsi Wadia, a globally recognised gynaecologist, has moved the Bombay HC to adopt his longtime caregiver, Rajeev Jha — raising questions of rights, legacy, and what defines family in modern India

Four Kansas school districts have been found by the U.S. Department of Education to have violated federal student privacy and sex-based protection laws. Findings indicate issues with parental access to gender transition information and the use of facilities and sports based on gender identity rather than sex. Proposed corrective measures aim to ensure compliance.

Tiger Woods is fighting in court to stop prosecutors from accessing his prescription records after his DUI arrest. His lawyer says it is about privacy rights, while prosecutors argue the records are important for their case. The court will now decide if those medical details can be used, making this a key moment in the legal process.

India's legal system faces a seismic shift as digital evidence, from encrypted chats to cloud data, overwhelms traditional methods. eDiscovery is now central to litigation, but laws struggle to keep pace with technology like AI and encryption, creating a critical need for adaptation to ensure justice in the digital age.

India's new Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Act, 2026, has sparked widespread protests by removing self-identification rights. Critics argue the law replaces individual autonomy with mandatory medical certification, contradicting previous legal precedents and the Supreme Court's NALSA judgment. Activists fear this regressive move will hinder access to essential rights and services for the transgender community.

Andhra Pradesh HC recently dismissed a petition, stressing that the ‘best interests’ of the child must take precedence over a parent’s attempt to gather evidence in divorce proceedings. Here’s what SC guidelines say about DNA testing

Superstar Mohanlal has approached the Delhi High Court seeking protection for his personality rights against the misuse of his identity in digital and AI-generated content. This move follows similar legal actions by other prominent actors. Meanwhile, his highly anticipated film 'Drishyam 3' has been rescheduled for a worldwide release on May 21, coinciding with his birthday.

The Andhra Pradesh High Court ruled that DNA tests for children in matrimonial disputes should not be ordered mechanically. Upholding a trial court's decision, the High Court emphasized protecting children's rights, stating they shouldn't be used as pawns. The court stressed that a parent's right to a fair trial doesn't override a child's fundamental rights and well-being.

Actor John Vijay has strongly condemned the intense public and media focus on actor Vijay and Trisha Krishnan's personal lives, deeming it "shameful." He urged for respect for privacy, emphasizing that public figures should be judged by their societal contributions and professional achievements, not their private relationships. This defense comes after their joint appearance at a wedding fueled further speculation.

In a landmark decision, the Andhra Pradesh High Court has drawn a firm line against involving children in DNA testing during divorce proceedings, effectively stating that they should never be treated as mere tools in adult disagreements.

The Supreme Court stated that public interest cannot justify broad access to private information of public officials, emphasizing a balance with the right to privacy. The court will consider a petition challenging the Digital Personal Data Protection Act's restrictions, which a petitioner argued nullifies RTI provisions for accessing background data of appointees and could enable state surveillance.

Maharashtra's legislative assembly passed the Freedom of Religion Bill 2026, aimed at preventing religious conversions through coercion or inducement. While Sena (UBT) supported the Mahayuti government's bill, opposition parties like Congress and NCP (SP) voiced concerns, deeming it unconstitutional and a violation of privacy. The bill is expected to be tabled in the Legislative Council soon.

At a recent moot court gathering, Justice Bal Krishna Narayan passionately underscored the paramount duty of judges to prioritize the legal rights of litigants. He remarked on how such competitions not only refine advocacy skills but also foster the essential balance of humility and intellect.

The Maharashtra Freedom of Religion Bill, 2026, seeks to criminalise conversions through coercion, fraud, inducement or marriage. However, the proposed bill has reopened a wider debate over privacy, inter-faith marriage, religious freedom and the expanding reach of the state

A popular Tollywood actress and a politician's family member has filed a cybercrime case in Hyderabad after facing online defamation and cyberbullying. Unidentified individuals allegedly posted vulgar and sexually explicit comments targeting her personal life and reputation. Police have registered a case under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and IT Act.

The nine-judge bench of the Supreme Court on Wednesday reserved its judgement over issue of whether right to privacy is a fundamental right or not. On July 26, the Centre had told the apex court that there is a fundamental right to privacy, but is a 'wholly qualified right'.

right to privacy doesn't end with a person's death and private chats and pictures of a deceased person cannot be disclosed under the RTI Act, the Calcutta High Court has ruled.

The NDA government on Thursday cited a six-decade old ruling of the Supreme Court to argue that citizens could not claim right to privacy as a fundamental right.

Former Karnataka high Court judge KS Puttaswamy, the lead petitioner in the right to privacy matter argues that choosing of same sex partners, however, is not a matter of privacy.

Mumbaikars were shocked when the Central government declare before the Supreme Court that a citizen's right to privacy was not absolute.

The home ministry is set to reject the demand of intelligence agencies for a “blanket” exemption from the purview of the right to privacy Bill and endorse the existing rider that requires them to intrude one's privacy only in the interest of “sovereignty, integrity and security of India”.