what is land mark in it ? Privacy is a fundamental Right, subject to restrictions. Obviously, otherwise world's daily work can not be carried out. Idealism and Pragmatism are two philosophies, Idealism can be chased but can not be carried out in practical life. It is Pragmatism which runs the World. Extremes are no practicable.
1. The concern, raised during the arguments as to what would fall under privacy, it said that an exhaustive list or catalog cannot be made.
So, it's implementation will depend on someone's whims! What's a great grey area to be used by corrupt leaders, police, influential peoples and don't know if they are non-existent in Judicial system.
2. The judgment said that privacy included at its core the preservation of personal intimacies, the sanctity of family life, marriage, procreation, the home and sexual orientation.
So, what will happen to the next census and any effort to effectively control population, which is essential for the future of our country.
Also what will happen if a person runs illegal activities, like prostitution within his/her residence? Who will bell the cat around his/her right to privacy?
There are so many inconsistencies, it's a Pandora's box.
Majority of our people are bothered about their daily struggle for existence and unaware of privacy.
When we use social networking sites or install mobile apps we surrender our privacy.
Crooked people and a few intellectuals will be very happy.
It would be good if the judgement doesn't have grey areas and specific, otherwise it will only help unscrupulous people to find loopholes in our already faulty legal system.
Re: Privacy - what's it!!!
by Sanjay Tomar on Aug 25, 2017 08:33 AM
Employers are asking how you are surviving want bank statement to trap your surviving details & you making asset or not can be dangerous used by them to destroy you. They can make you hand to mouth that is what happening in India. People are becoming hand to mouth only Corporate becoming rich day by day is because they can control us to exploit us in worst manner to make us hand to mouth helpless. Politician not interested to safe people only need money can do anything with people they do not care for people is reason they are making anti people policy. Aadhar can be dangerous link with many things violate privacy as fundamental right if misused getting leak misused by government and Corporate to exploit people in India.
1. The concern, raised during the arguments as to what would fall under privacy, it said that an exhaustive list or catalog cannot be made.
So, it's implementation will depend on someone's whims! What's a great grey area to be used by corrupt leaders, police, influential peoples and don't know if they are non-existent in Judicial system.
2. The judgment said that privacy included at its core the preservation of personal intimacies, the sanctity of family life, marriage, procreation, the home and sexual orientation.
So, what will happen to the next census and any effort to effectively control population, which is essential for the future of our country.
Also what will happen if a person runs illegal activities, like prostitution within his/her residence? Who will bell the cat around his/her right to privacy?
There are so many inconsistencies, it's a Pandora's box.
Majority of our people are bothered about their daily struggle for existence and unaware of privacy.
When we use social networking sites or install mobile apps we surrender our privacy.
Crooked people and a few intellectuals will be very happy.
It would be good if the judgement doesn't have grey areas and specific, otherwise it will only help unscrupulous people to find loopholes in our already faulty legal system.
Re: Privacy a Fundamental Right, rules SC
by Against Pseudos on Aug 25, 2017 05:47 AM
Subject to permissible restrictions... Which was the govt position all along. You keep crying. :-)
SC judgement has come a bit late after the damage is already done. Most of the citizens have been FORCED by the government to link Aadhar number to PAN and bank accounts thereby putting the Aadhar details and bank accounts to great risk. Let the government give an option for delinking Aadhar details from PAN and bank accounts to safeguard the privacy of citizens.
can spend the next few days rigorously and publicly rubbing burnol into his bung hole. There is just no other way left now to put out the fire in his nether area !
And as for komaaaaali Modi, well, he can do so in secret (as he can still pretend that the move to make intrusions into a citizens private life was not his idea or initiative or that he did not even encourage it) !
The Nine Member Judges are ignorant according to the super wise Law Minister. How can the PM tolerate such a minister to continue in the Minister? Look at Railway Minister who blames the trains for accidents and not the poor maintenance of Railways.
Re: Privacy a Fundamental Right, rules SC
by P S SHAH on Aug 26, 2017 09:19 AM
The law minister Ravishankar Prasad know law very well being a lawyer himself and he know very well what he say.
Re: Privacy a Fundamental Right, rules SC
by sunil vaidya on Oct 10, 2017 04:58 AM
the govt is made of such idiots...even amit shah blamed the riots after ram rahim verdict to the judge who passed the sentence...according to shah if the judge had delayed naming the quantum of sentence the riots would have been avoided...
this govt. did not want to put ram rahim in the jail in the first place...thanks to MMS and the cbi investigating officer that the baba is inside the jail...
At the outset right below the headline, 'Privacy a Fundamental Right, rules SC' ... it says:
'A nine-judge Constitution bench unanimously overruled the TWO EARLIER JUDGEMENTS OF THE APEX COURT that right to privacy is not protected under the Constitution.'
The report also says: 'THE SUBSEQUENT VERDICTS (pronounced after the 1050 and 1960 verdicts) M P Sharma and Kharak Singh)HAVE LAID DOWN THE CORRECT POSITION OF THE LAW'.
(Kindly note the portions in all caps are not capitalised in the original. i have only used all caps for emphasis and your attention).
i was surprised to read that "subsequent verdicts pronounced after the 1950 and 1960 verdicts ... have laid down the correct position of the law".
If so, why was there a need to have set up yet another "nine-judge Constitution bench" just to unanimously overrule the two earlier judgements -- of 1950 and 1960 -- of the apex court?
How many verdicts were there of the apex court after the (1950 and 1960 verdicts)one that "have laid down the correct position of the law."
What was the need to waste money and time of the apex court?
AND P L E A S E tell us which submissions made by that "battery of senior lawyers" were for and how many were against. It would be useful for the public to know this.
Re: Am cofused by the reort of this verdict.
by V Nagarajan on Aug 24, 2017 05:11 PM
You are correct? Not just this. Everything about India and its ways of doing things confuse me.There are one million cases pending in each court but SC thinks triple talaq and privacy is important.What misplaced priorities?Each HC has 50% vacancies. Who & when are they going to fill it?How are they planning to stop train accidents?Sad.
Re: Re: Am cofused by the reort of this verdict.
by Vijay Sahani on Aug 24, 2017 10:34 PM
Triple Talaq affect at least 9 crore citizens and privacy affects 1.25 billion citizens of India and you say these are misplaced priorities?
