LANDMARK CASE
K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India
(2017) 10 SCC 1 · Supreme Court of India · Constitutional law
At a glance
- Citation: (2017) 10 SCC 1
- Court: Supreme Court of India
- Area of law: Constitutional law
- In one line: A nine judge bench unanimously held privacy is a fundamental right, part of Article 21 and Part III, overruling M.P. Sharma and Kharak Singh on this point.
1 Facts
A retired judge challenged the Aadhaar scheme. The government argued there was no fundamental right to privacy, relying on older judgments.
2 Issue
Is privacy a fundamental right under the Constitution?
3 What the court decided
A nine judge bench unanimously held privacy is a fundamental right, part of Article 21 and Part III, overruling M.P. Sharma and Kharak Singh on this point.
4 Why it matters
It is the foundation of data protection law in India and later decisions on sexual orientation, adultery and surveillance.
5 Think about it
What three part test did the Court set for restricting privacy, and how would you apply it to a new app tracking students?
6 Analyse it yourself
Read the full judgment from an official source or a law database, then brief it in seven steps: facts, issues, arguments, decision, ratio, obiter and significance. Always check the citation before you rely on it.
7 More cases on Constitutional law
- A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras AIR 1950 SC 27
- ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (1976) 2 SCC 521
- Air India v. Nergesh Meerza (1981) 4 SCC 335
- Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib Sehravardi (1981) 1 SCC 722
- Anuj Garg v. Hotel Association of India (2008) 3 SCC 1
- Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020) 3 SCC 637
All 366 landmark cases · Today's Case of the Day · Weekly quiz
← K.M. Nanavati v. State of MaharashtraK.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (Aadhaar) →
A short teaching summary for students. Educational content only, not legal advice.