Reasonable Restriction
Privacy is not absolute. How the state can restrict it.
🎯 Learning Objectives
- ▸ Understand what constitutes a "reasonable restriction"
- ▸ Analyze the tests for restricting fundamental rights
- ▸ Understand how the state can access data under the DPDPA
The Concept
You cannot shout "fire" in a crowded theatre. Similarly, you cannot claim privacy to hide a crime. The Constitution allows the state to impose reasonable restrictions on fundamental rights for specific purposes:
- • Sovereignty and integrity of India
- • Security of the State
- • Friendly relations with foreign States
- • Public order
- • Decency or morality
- • Contempt of court
- • Defamation
- • Incitement to an offence
The Proportionality Test
The Puttaswamy judgment established that even if a restriction is for a legitimate aim, it must be "proportionate." This means the government cannot use a sledgehammer to crack a nut. If a less intrusive measure works, the government must use it.
However, the DPDPA (Section 17) gives the State broad exemptions. The government can exempt its agencies from the Act for national security, investigation of crimes, etc. This is a controversial aspect of the law.
📖 Glossary
- Proportionality
- A legal test that ensures the severity of a restriction is proportionate to the objective it seeks to achieve.
- State Exemption
- Provisions in the DPDPA that allow government agencies to bypass certain data protection requirements.
🔑 Key Takeaways
- Rights are not absolute; they are subject to reasonable restrictions.
- Restrictions must be backed by law, serve a legitimate aim, and be proportionate.
- The DPDPA has broad exemptions for the State (Section 17).
📚 Further Reading
- K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India — Supreme Court of India (2017)
Shilpi Kulshrestha
Shilpi is a corporate lawyer with over a decade of experience in data protection, company law, and regulatory compliance. She has advised 50+ startups and enterprises on DPDPA readiness, privacy gover...