Browse by Stream
QnA
Home
QnA
Go To Your Study Dashboard

Get Answers to all your Questions

header-bg qa
  • Home
  • Law
  • Read the given passage very carefully and answer the questions. Justice MM Sundresh of the Supreme Court observed that there is a need to codify the law enabling law enfo

Read the given passage very carefully and answer the questions.

Justice MM Sundresh of the Supreme Court observed that there is a need to codify the law enabling law enforcement agencies to carry out surveillance while ensuring the fundamental rights, including the right to privacy, are safeguarded. “Any action facilitating State machinery must be backed by the authority of law. For that, there must be a codified law that empowers an investigating agency to undertake an act of surveillance. Needless to state, such a law must be subject to the Constitutional mandate, with specific reference to Part III of the Constitution. This would prevent any arbitrary action while preserving the privacy of the individual,” he said. He emphasized that the need of the hour is to take note of the voice and concerns expressed in the Puttaswamy judgment, which held that privacy is a fundamental right. There is a need to uphold privacy through the doctrine of proportionality, the judge explained. A clear demarcation is needed by drawing a Lakshman Rekha during a criminal investigation

(when surveillance is used),” he said. Speaking on the need for surveillance, Justice Sundresh said, “Surveillance and privacy must live and function together. As long as there is privacy, surveillance will certainly continue. The modern world has indeed become a difficult place to live and to maintain peace. The cost of peace is obviously very high. Any State which lacks expert surveillance would be considered a weak one and susceptible to attack from unknown sources. It may also be required in the larger interest of the public.”

Question: V arrived at his house from work extremely late at night. Even though his job hours were from 9 to 6, this became his normal habit. He had been returning home by 11 or 12 at night for the last two months. His wife saw this and thought he could be keeping something from her. The following morning, she went with V to his office to find out. There was no proof against him that she could locate. She then made the decision to accompany him back home, where she was shocked to see that V was busy organizing their 25th wedding anniversary. She felt guilty about questioning V. V was hurt to learn this and promptly filed a complaint alleging that his wife had violated his right to privacy. Check the veracity of his assertion

Option: 1

-------His claim cannot be upheld since his wife cannot be accused of violating his right to privacy.

 


Option: 2

-----His claim cannot be upheld because his wife had a legitimate reason to accompany him to and from work.

 


Option: 3

She illegally followed him without his permission, thus his claim will be upheld.

 


Option: 4

To remark on the veracity of V’s claims, more information is needed from the passage.

 


Answers (1)

best_answer

In accordance with the passage, In order to do such, there must be written legislation authorizing an investigating agency to perform an act of surveillance. A law of this nature must adhere to the requirements of the Constitution, specifically Part III of the Constitution. In addition to protecting the person’s privacy, this would stop any arbitrary action. The whole passage is about state surveillance. As a result, we rule all options A, B and C.

 

Posted by

Info Expert 30

View full answer

Similar Questions

Trending Articles/News

anam-khan

Intend to complete CLAT UG hearing at earliest for results to be declared: Delhi HC
anam-khan

CLAT 2025 LIVE: Delhi High Court reserves UG verdict, PG hearing on April 21

Latest Question