LANDMARK CASE
Kharak Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh
AIR 1963 SC 1295 · Supreme Court of India · Constitutional law
At a glance
- Citation: AIR 1963 SC 1295
- Court: Supreme Court of India
- Area of law: Constitutional law
- In one line: Night visits were struck down under Article 21, but the majority held there was no right to privacy. Justice Subba Rao dissented.
1 Facts
The police conducted surveillance, including night domiciliary visits, of a suspected person.
2 Issue
Do surveillance regulations violate personal liberty?
3 What the court decided
Night visits were struck down under Article 21, but the majority held there was no right to privacy. Justice Subba Rao dissented.
4 Why it matters
The dissent was vindicated in Puttaswamy (2017).
5 Think about it
Why did Subba Rao J's dissent eventually win?
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
← Keshavan Madhava Menon v. State of BombayKihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu →
A short teaching summary for students. Educational content only, not legal advice.