Overview
The Supreme Court disposed three public interest litigations in 2026 that expose how state agencies, private firms and online platforms jointly monitor citizens. The cases involve facial recognition, online deepfakes, and the SIR of electoral rolls. Together they illustrate a layered surveillance ecosystem that raises serious privacy and democratic concerns.
Key Developments (2026)
- August: The Supreme Court dismissed a PIL on doxxing and deepfakes, directing Union ministries to frame remedial rules.
- July: Rajya Sabha MP A.A. Rahim challenged the Delhi Police’s use of facial recognition, AI‑enabled smart glasses, drones and a mobile command centre during the Cockroach Janta Party protests. Data were stored by two private firms.
- May: The Election Commission upheld its SIR of electoral rolls, despite criticism that many eligible voters could be removed.
Important Facts
• The Delhi Police’s surveillance kit included facial recognition cameras, AI glasses and drones.
• Women protestors faced online doxxing: personal details, false rape accusations and death threats were spread within hours.
• Bihar’s SIR started with about 7.89 crore electors and ended with 7.42 crore, showing a large‑scale removal of names.
• The K.S. Puttaswamy vs Union of India decision protects privacy against state action, but the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 permits the Union to exempt state instruments, weakening that protection.
Exam Relevance
• Polity (GS2): Understanding the balance between state surveillance powers and constitutional privacy rights is essential for questions on fundamental rights, the role of the judiciary, and the functioning of agencies like the Election Commission.
• Security & Technology (GS2): The rise of AI‑driven tools such as facial recognition and deepfakes tests candidates’ grasp of emerging threats.
• Ethics (GS4): The ethical dilemma of using surveillance for public order versus individual dignity aligns with questions on privacy, data protection, and the right to dissent.
Way Forward
- Enact a comprehensive DPDP Act amendment that limits exemptions for state agencies and mandates transparent audit of data held by private firms.
- Introduce statutory guidelines for the use of facial recognition and AI tools, including prior judicial approval and periodic impact assessments.
- Strengthen the oversight mechanism of the Election Commission to ensure that SIR exercises do not disenfranchise vulnerable groups.
- Promote public awareness campaigns on digital hygiene to curb the spread of deepfakes and online doxxing.
Addressing these issues requires a coordinated approach that treats surveillance as a shared responsibility of the state, private sector and civil society, ensuring that privacy protections keep pace with technological advances.