![]() The preservation of constitutional liberty is, so to speak, work in progress. The overarching presence of state and non- state entities regulates aspects of social existence which bear upon the freedom of the individual. Those relationships may and do often pose questions to autonomy and free choice. Yet the autonomy of the individual is conditioned by her relationships with the rest of society. If privacy is to be construed as a protected constitutional value, it would redefine in significant ways our concepts of liberty and the entitlements that flow out of its protection.Ģ Privacy, in its simplest sense, allows each human being to be left alone in a core which is inviolable. This case presents challenges for constitutional interpretation. The issue reaches out to the foundation of a constitutional culture based on the protection of human rights and enables this Court to revisit the basic principles on which our Constitution has been founded and their consequences for a way of life it seeks to protect. Surendra Nath, Senior Advocates for the appearing parties.ġ Nine judges of this Court assembled to determine whether privacy is a constitutionally protected value. Sundaram, Rakesh Dwivedi, Sajan Poovayya, Jayant Bhushan, J.S. ![]() Singh, Shiv Mangal Sharma, Additional Advocates General, Arvind Datar, Ms Meenakshi Arora, Anand Grover, Shyam Divan, Gopal Subramanium, C.A. Venugopal, Attorney General, Tushar Mehta, Additional Solicitor General, Jugal Kishore Gilda, Advocate General, D.K.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |