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: P had CCTV cameras set up in each of the home’s rooms. There were 5 staff members in total. Since a few months ago, X and Z have been scheming to rob him at gunpoint, and they finally succeeded. The police requested that they check the CCTV footage from each room in order to find the burglars. P agreed with this. Determine if his right to privacy has been violated in this particular case.

Option: 1

-----Since P granted his permission for the investigation, his right to privacy has not been breached.

 


Option: 2

------He was forced to give the police permission to access his CCTV footage, which is a violation of his right to privacy

 


Option: 3

-------P’s right to privacy was not breached because the investigation was conducted for his benefit.

 


Option: 4

------Since the tape was necessary for the capture of the criminals, P’s right to privacy was not breached.

 


Answers (1)

best_answer

An individual’s right to privacy can be breached if their privacy is invaded in an unauthorized and illegal manner. It is clear from using common sense that P’s right to privacy has not been harmed since he gave the police permission to access the CCTV. We rule out option B as a result. Options c) and d) are ruled out since they both offer reasoning that is illogical, absurd, and lacking in any legal justification.

Posted by

Divya Prakash Singh

View full answer

Similar Questions

Trending Articles/News

anam-khan

CLAT 2025 Hearing LIVE: Delhi HC seeks response from Consortium in 2 weeks; next hearing on April 7
anam-khan

CLAT PG counselling 2025 dates soon for LLM; category-wise expected cut-offs for top NLUs
anam-khan

CLAT 2025 counselling likely to begin after Delhi HC hearing on March 3; selection process explained

Latest Question