India’s privacy debate faces scrutiny over surveillance across state and private systems
A commentary in The Hindu argues that facial recognition, online doxxing and electoral-roll verification represent connected forms of surveillance rather than isolated privacy disputes. It says India’s legal protections remain fragmented when personal information moves among government agencies, private companies, online networks and foreign technology providers.
India’s current privacy debate must address surveillance that operates across government agencies, private companies and online networks, rather than treating each incident as a separate dispute, according to an analysis published by The Hindu. The commentary links three recent developments: a Supreme Court decision on doxxing and deepfakes, a petition challenging Delhi Police use of facial recognition during Cockroach Janta Party protests, and the court’s ruling upholding the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls. The petition by Rajya Sabha member A.A.
Rahim alleges that police used facial recognition, artificial-intelligence-enabled smart glasses, drones and a mobile command vehicle during protests at Jantar Mantar. It also alleges that data was hosted by two private companies. The analysis says women who participated in the protests were subsequently targeted online, with their personal details published alongside reported rape and death threats.
It argues that digital identification can quickly connect a photograph to a person’s address. The commentary also points to the electoral-roll exercise as another form of identity screening. It says Bihar’s revision began with about 7.89 crore electors and ended with a final roll of 7.42 crore, while noting that the Supreme Court held the Election Commission could examine citizenship for the limited purpose of revising the roll.
The author, Pankhuri Agarwal of King’s Business School, says India’s constitutional privacy protection, recognised in the 2017 Puttaswamy judgment, is primarily framed around state action. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, meanwhile, allows the Union government to exempt state instrumentalities on specified grounds. The analysis says uncertainty remains over responsibility when police-collected information is held by private companies, circulated online and used to target individuals.
It argues that stronger safeguards must reflect the speed and scale of modern surveillance.
This independently written report is based on information supplied by the named publisher. Vertrix News has not independently verified the source report.