Privacy versus the Right to Know: Supreme Court Sends the DPDP-RTI Clash to a Constitution Bench

The Supreme Court has referred to a larger bench the question of whether the Digital Personal Data Protection Act's amendment to the RTI Act uses privacy as a pretext to gut citizens' right to information.

The Supreme Court has referred to a Constitution Bench the question of whether Section 44(3) of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 — which amended Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act — unconstitutionally guts the right to information. The amendment removed the earlier public-interest balancing test and the rule that information available to Parliament cannot be denied to citizens, making 'personal information' exempt from disclosure as a blanket class.

The case pits Article 19's implicit right to know, which underlies the RTI Act, against Article 21's right to privacy. Since reconciling these two fundamental rights in the context of a legislative amendment raises a substantial constitutional question, Article 145 required a bench of at least five judges; the petitions were filed under Article 32.

Remember: pre-amendment Section 8(1)(j) had a public-interest override; the DPDP amendment removed it, making personal information exempt without case-by-case balancing. Petitioners argue this weakens accountability over public officials. The matter now awaits authoritative adjudication by a Constitution Bench.