Is Privacy a Fundamental Right in the Age of Artificial Intelligence

INTRODUCTION :

Privacy was once protected by locked doors and sealed letters ; however with emerging trend of AI , privacy is no longer merely a personal concern but it has now become a constitutional ,ethical and human rights challenge .  Imagine waking up to discover that an algorithm knows your political views , your medical history , your shopping habits , your location and even the likelihood of your next decision .  In a recent case of 2025 , a Austrian citizen was refused extension of a mobile phone contract based on an automated credit assessment carried out by Dun & Bradstreet Austria GmbH (D&B)[1]. The court of justice of European union held that individuals are entitled to meaningful information about the logic underlying algorithm decisions . These developments raise a question infront of us in consideration of India’s legal framework regarding emergence of AI into our day-to day life and citizen`s privacy .

THE EVOLUTION OF PRIVACY AS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT :

The Right to Privacy is a human right, enshrined in numerous international covenants and institutions as reflected in Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948[2] and Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966[3]. Constitution of India does not expressly mention right to privacy ,instead it evolved through judicial interpretations . In 2017, a nine – judges bench of the Supreme Court of India affirmed this right in the landmark judgement K.S Puttaswamy v. Union of India [4]case, recognizing privacy as a constitutional and fundamental right under Article 21 of Part III of the Indian Constitution . However , cases like M.P. Sharma v Satish Chandra (1954 ) [5]& Kharak Singh v State of UP (1961)  [6]contributed in building the judicial approach regarding the right of privacy but the right got recognition in the case of  M. Gobind vs. State of MP & ANR (1975) [7]for the very first time where the court introduced the compelling state interest test from American jurisprudence .

In the digital age, privacy safeguards personal data, preventing unauthorized access to sensitive information, which is crucial for protecting identity and financial security and maintaining trust in digital services.  But the  Indian legal framework doesn’t specifically address contemporary concerns arising from artificial intelligence , algorithm profiling , or automated decision making . These are new legal challenges to the Indian framework demanding flexible legal framework adapting these concerns and providing reliable safeguards .

AI AND PRIVACY :

Artificial Intelligence has transformed the way decisions are made in both the public and private sectors. From determining creditworthiness to assisting in recruitment and policing, AI-driven algorithms increasingly influence decisions that have significant legal consequences. While these technologies promise efficiency and accuracy, they also raise fundamental concerns regarding privacy, transparency, and accountability.  The term algorithm describes a series of steps through which particular inputs can be turned into outputs. The proliferation of these systems in a number of socially consequential areas, such as policing, education, finance and healthcare, both within and external to government, has spurred substantial debates on their implications for important public values, centred largely around values of transparency, fairness and accountability of these systems[8].

 This framing, while not exhaustive of the range of implications posed by the widespread use of automated decision-making systems and algorithmic technologies, emphasizes how algorithmic decision-making systems challenge important assumptions and expectations about consequential decision-making that concerns people relating to the transparency about how a decision is made, the ‘fairness’ of such a decision, and who should be accountable for these decisions. The K.S Puttaswamy judgement recognized privacy which also include informational privacy which thereby provided individuals to have control over their personal data which is being hampered as there’s no transparency in what data the AI used to reach the decision or it somehow inferred from the information which the individual didn`t even directly disclose. The increasing dependency on the artificial intelligence has raised concerns beyond traditional notions of privacy and raised constitutional concerns regarding transparency , accountability and fairness in algorithm decision making .

AI raised several privacy concerns which are relevant to the contemporary world which includes data profiling , behavioral surveillance and facial recognition technology . These issues are reflected into our day -to- day life  .Common examples can be observed when one search can subsequently turn into  receiving advertisements on every platform such as Instagram and Facebook .   Another example can be when a user uploads their photograph and gives the AI prompt to have their desired outputs . while these features lets users enjoy technological benefits, it also highlights the need of transparency , informed consent and data protection safeguards in accordance with the rights recognized under Article 21 of the Indian constitution .

To create a balanced AI governance framework, India must ensure that AI innovation aligns with privacy rights, ethical considerations, and accountability mechanisms. This requires a strong regulatory foundation, drawing insights from international legal frameworks such as European union`s general data protection regulation .

INDIA,S LEGAL FRAMEWORK:

Unlike other states evolving there laws according to the emerging issues related to AI , India doesn’t yet have a single consolidated law regarding AI . Multiple statutes and policies indirectly regulate AI systems . These include :

1. Indian constitution ( Article 21)
2. Information technology act , 2000 and rules
3. Information technology ( intermediary guidelines and digital media ethics code ) rules ,2021
4. Digital personal data protection act , 2023
5. Sector based regulations ( RBI guidelines , IRDAI rules , medical device law , transport law etc..) .
6. NITI Aayog`s responsible AI framework

While these laws provide important safeguards for privacy and data protection , they do not comprehensively address issues in consideration of the privacy in the era of Artificial Intelligence . They only focus on unprecedented technological innovations which cannot solely solve the robust legal concerns such as data profiling , algorithm decision making , transparency and informational privacy. As a result , India’s legal framework remains fragmented , making it necessary to examine each instrument and assess whether it effectively addresses the unique privacy challenges posed by AI .  For example –

Article 21 of the Indian constitution established the right to privacy as a fundamental right which impliedly includes informational privacy that every individual has rights over the collection , storage and dissemination of their personal data[9]. Although the puttaswamy judgement provides a strong constitutional foundation , in the age of AI , the law requires greater significance in prescribing specific standards to deal with these emerging AI -driven issues .

The IT Act, 2000 was India’s first legislation to regulate the digital realm, inspired by the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce . Its objectives included legalizing electronic transactions, recognizing digital signatures, promoting e-governance, and addressing cybercrimes like hacking (Section 66) and data theft. Key provisions, such as Section 43A and the SPDI Rules, 2011, mandated “reasonable security practices” for sensitive personal data, while Section 79 offered intermediaries “safe harbour” immunity. [10]However, the IT Act’s scope, designed for an earlier stage of digital development , is limited in today’s data economy. It fails to address AI-driven challenges like algorithmic bias, surveillance, or cross-border data flows, and its weak enforcement and broad government powers under Section 69 raise privacy concerns.

The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (commonly referred to as the DPDP Act or DPDPA-2023) is a comprehensive data privacy law enacted by the Parliament of India which strengthens data protection beyond the IT act, 2000. The legislation establishes a legal framework for the processing of digital personal data, aiming to balance individuals’ right to protect their privacy with the necessity of processing data for lawful purposes. [11]Yet, while the Act incorporates key principles such as shared consent, data minimization, and lawful processing, it remains insufficient to address the distinct and evolving privacy risks introduced by AI technologies.[12] Issues such as algorithmic bias, re-identification of anonymized data, AI driven surveillance, and obscurity in automated decisions continue to challenge the existing regulatory framework[13].

NITI Aayog`s national strategy for artificial intelligence( AI for ALL)  provides for significant steps towards promotion of responsible development and deployment of the growing influence of artificial intelligence.  Within this right to privacy, a majority of the judges ruled that the right to privacy comprises, among other principles, the right to autonomy over one’s choices and one’s information. As previously discussed, the essential nature of AI systems involves the processing of a vast amount of data[14]. NITI Aayog has emphasized that AI systems should be deployed in a manner that is ethical , transparent , accountable and respectful of individual privacy . However , the framework is advisory in nature and it can`t be enforced as a matter of right . It provides for voluntary principles and doesn’t have statutory mechanisms to enforce the values it provides .

Indian legal framework concerning AI definitely reflects India’s commitment towards ethical AI governance but lack in implementing these values . The absence of binding provisions  governing algorithm transparency, automated decision – making and other relevant issues indicates that the existing legal framework lacks significant development to meet the challenges posed by rapidly evolving AI technologies .

WAY FORWARD :

The rapid integration of  Artificial Intelligence into our day-today life requires subsequent safeguard measures with legal backing . Indian legal framework have already built a base by providing foundation through constitutional protections and data protection legislation but to implement the whole structure which is also legally enforceable ,a balanced and forward looking regulatory approach is therefore essential . Some of the recommendations are as follow:

Dedicated legal framework :

India should consider enacting well defined legal framework .  To create a balanced AI governance framework, India must ensure that AI innovation aligns with privacy rights, ethical considerations, and accountability mechanisms. This requires a strong regulatory foundation . A Specified framework would also provide greater legal certainty.

Algorithm transparency :

As previously discussed , AI system involves the processing of vast amount of data but the individuals should have access to information regarding the factors influencing algorithm decision making . .transparency will increase public trust in AI and technological advancements and it will ensure them that the system involves constitutional principles like fairness and promotes accountability .

Individual autonomy and informed consent :

As the NITI Aayog`s responsible Ai framework provides that the fact that personal data can be collected and tracked across databases, outside a consent-based framework, is itself a violation of the right to informational autonomy. The framework provides for advisory policy which should be legally enforced as informational autonomy is inherent right of “right to privacy” which was established under article 21 of the Indian constitution . the framework should ensure that the deployment of AI remains consistent with the constitutional values of privacy .

Public awareness :

A global survey by the Pew Research Centre covering 25 countries  has found that India ranks lowest in public awareness about Artificial intelligence . Despite India’s rapid digital [15]transformation and government focus on emerging technologies , only a small section of Indians claim to have substantial knowledge about AI . Promoting digital literacy would empower citizens to make informed decisions and exercise their privacy rights more effectively .

By strengthening these measures , promoting transparency , consent , and ensuring responsible AI governance, India can create a regulatory framework that fosters innovation while preserving the fundamental right to privacy as guaranteed by the Constitution of India .

CONCLUSION

The emergence of Artificial intelligence has transitioned the manner in which personal data may be collected , stored and deployed according to the raising needs of today. While these technological advancements bring several benefits to the table , it subsequently raise concerns regarding transparency , privacy and accountability .  As discussed in this article the puttaswamy judgement established a strong constitutional foundation by recognizing right to privacy as inherent part of Article 21.  However , there are certain legal gaps in the existing legal framework , particularly in relation to the algorithm decision making , data  profiling and informational autonomy .  Statutes like Digital personal data protection act, 2023 and NITI Aayog’s responsible AI framework provided significant steps toward regulating the ethical AI governance , they do not comprehensively address these contemporary issues .

Therefore , India needs a strong legal framework alongside all these  developments which will ensure that technological innovation develops without compromising the constitutional rights of individuals in this age of Artificial Intelligence.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Table of cases :

• CK v magistrat der stadt wien(case c- 203/22) (court of justice of the European union ,first chamber,27 february 2025)
• Justice K.S Puttaswamy (retd.) v Union of india [2017] 10 SCC 1
• Kharak Singh v State of Uttar Pradesh AIR [1963] SC 1295
• Gobind v State of Madhya Pradesh (1975) 2 SCC 148
• MP Sharma v Satish Chandra AIR [1954 ] SC 300

Table of legislation:

• Constitution of India.
• Information Technology Act 2000.
• Information Technology (Reasonable Security Practices and Procedures and Sensitive Personal Data or Information) Rules 2011.
• Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules 2021.
• Digital Personal Data Protection Act 2023

Journal articles :

• Akshaya R and Devadharshini VV, An analysis on Artificial Intelligence and data privacy in India (2025) Indian journal of law and legal research
• Dharmendra Kumar , regulating innovation :The IT Act 2000 and DPDP Act 2023 in the age of AI and Data (2025) Journal of emerging Technologies and Innovative research

Books and Chapter :

• Joshi D, ‘Automated Administration: Administrative Law and Algorithmic Decision-Making in India’ in Sudhir Krishnaswamy and Divij Joshi (eds), The Philosophy and Law of Information Regulation in India (Centre for Law and Policy Research 2022).

Websites:

• NITI Aayog, National Strategy for Artificial Intelligence #AIForAll (NITI Aayog 2018) https://www.niti.gov.in⁠
• Vajiram Editor, ‘Right to Privacy: Evolution, Significance, Challenges’ Vajiram & Ravi (7 July 2026) https://vajiramandravi.com/upsc-exam/right-to-privacy/

Newspaper :

• The Hindu Data Team, ‘According to a Survey of 25 Countries, Indians are Least Aware of AI’ The Hindu (31 October 2025) https://www.thehindu.com/data/according-to-a-survey-of-25-countries-indians-are-least-aware-of-ai/article69709562.ece⁠

[1] CK v magistrat der stadt wien(case c- 203/22) (court of justice of the European union ,first chamber,27 february 2025)   

[2] Universal declaration of human rights (adopted 10 december 1948 UNGA Res 217 A(III)) art 12

[3] International covenant on civil and political rights (adopted 16 december 1966, entered into force 23 march 1976 ) 999 UNTS 171 , art 17

[4] Justice K.S Puttaswamy (retd.) v Union of india [2017] 10 SCC1

[5] MP Sharma v Satish Chandra AIR [1954 ] SC 300

[6] Kharak Singh v State of Uttar Pradesh AIR [1963] SC 1295

[7]M. Gobind v State of Madhya Pradesh (1975) 2 SCC 148

[8] Divij Joshi, ‘Automated Administration: Administrative Law and Algorithmic Decision-Making in India’ in Sudhir Krishnaswamy and Divij Joshi (eds), The Philosophy and Law of Information Regulation in India (Centre for Law and Policy Research 2022) https://publications.clpr.org.in/the-philosophy-and-law-of-information-regulation-in-india/chapter/automated-administration-administrative-law-and-algorithmic-decision-making-in-india/⁠ accessed 4 August 2026

[9] Constitution of India, art 21

[10] Information Technology Act 2000, ss 43A, 69

[11] Digital Personal Data Protection Act 2023

[12] Dharmendra Kumar, ‘Regulating Innovation: The IT Act 2000 and DPDP Act 2023 in the Age of AI and Data’ (2025) 12(8) Journal of Emerging Technologies and Innovative Research https://www.jetir.org⁠ accessed 6 August 2026

[13] Akshaya R and Devadharshini VV, ‘An Analysis on Artificial Intelligence and Data Privacy in India’ Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research (26 April 2025) https://ijllr.com/post/an-analysis-on-artificial-intelligence-and-data-privacy-in-india⁠ accessed 3 August 2026

[14] NITI Aayog, ‘National Strategy for Artificial Intelligence’ (NITI Aayog , 2018) https://www. Niti.gov.in accessed on 5 august 2026

[15] The Hindu Data Team, ‘According to a survey of 25 countries, Indians are least aware of AI’ The Hindu (31 October 2025) https://www.thehindu.com/data/according-to-a-survey-of-25-countries-indians-are-least-aware-of-ai/article69709562.ece accessed 5 August 2026