"Supreme Court Refers RTI-DPDP Privacy Clash to Constitution Bench"
Section 8(1)(j)
RTI Act clause allowing withholding of personal information unrelated to public activity or causing unwarranted privacy invasion
Public interest override
a rule letting disclosure of otherwise exempt information when larger public interest justifies it
The Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005 gives every citizen the right to ask for information from public authorities. The goal is to create informed citizens and make government accountable. It started after the older Official Secrets Act, 1923 ended the culture of secrecy. One key rule is Section 8(1)(j). It allowed public authorities to refuse personal information in two cases: if the information had no link to any public activity or interest, or if sharing it would invade someone's privacy unfairly. But the original rule had a public interest override. This meant a Public Information Officer could still share private-seeming information if the larger public good required it.
In Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court of India v. Subhash Chandra Agarwal (2019), the Supreme Court looked at this balance. It decided that personal information should stay private unless disclosure is genuinely necessary for a larger public interest. This means each case must be weighed separately, not refused automatically. This 2019 ruling is the legal standard the current dispute will be tested against. Similar debates have long asked whether a secrecy-style bar should override a transparency law, or whether case-by-case balancing should prevail. The Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023 was passed to control how personal data is collected, processed and protected in India. It covers consent requirements and created a Data Protection Board to decide disputes. But inside this data-protection law was Section 44(3). This section changed RTI's Section 8(1)(j) itself.
Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act removed the public interest override and replaced the earlier balancing test with a blanket bar on disclosing any information that relates to personal information. This is a major change. Before, an officer had to weigh privacy against public interest. Now, personal information cannot be disclosed at all, no matter how important the public interest might be. In practice, authorities can now refuse information on the assets of public officials, government procurement records, audit reports or details of public spending. This is because such records often contain some personal information mixed with otherwise public data.
Civil society groups point to a deeper problem. …
There is a view that the Official Secrets Act is an obstacle to the implementation of Right to Information Act. Do you agree with the view? Discuss.
"Recent amendments to the Right to Information Act will have profound impact on the autonomy and independence of the Information Commission". Discuss.
Describe the context and salient features of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023
Consider the following statements regarding the amendment to Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005:
1.It was introduced through Section 44(3) of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023.
2.It removed the public interest override that earlier permitted disclosure of personal information in larger public interest.
3.It expanded the categories of information exempt from disclosure under the Official Secrets Act, 1923.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Which of the following statements about the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 is/are correct?
1.Non-compliance can attract penalties up to ₹250 crore.
2.It establishes the Data Protection Board as the adjudicatory authority.
3.It amended Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act through Section 44(3).
Select the correct answer using the code given below:
With reference to the Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court of India v. Subhash Chandra Agarwal case (2019), which of the following is the correct position held by the Supreme Court?
Match List-I (provision/body) with List-II (what it does) and select the correct answer using the codes given below:
List-I
A.Section 8(1)(j), RTI Act (original)
B.Section 44(3), DPDP Act, 2023
C.Section 7, DPDP Act, 2023
D.Data Protection Board
List-II
1.Allows state to process personal data without consent for certain functions
2.Adjudicatory authority under the DPDP Act
3.Amended RTI's personal information exemption
4.Contained the original public interest override
The Supreme Court's referral of petitions on the RTI-DPDP amendment to a Constitution Bench primarily concerns which constitutional question?
Want the full note, Prelims Facts & MCQ answers?
Create a free account — takes less than a minute.
Create free account