Overview
The Supreme Court on 7 August 2026 agreed to examine whether the DPDP Act can undermine the RTI Act by labeling all data as ‘personal’ and by restricting journalists.
Key Developments
- Justices noted that both the Supreme Court and the two statutes are central laws and must be harmonised.
- Justice Joymalya Bagchi observed that the RTI law covers a broader domain than the DPDP law, which applies only to digital data.
- The court will scrutinise whether the “cautionary approach” of Section 44(3) effectively repeals earlier transparency provisions.
- Petitioners argue that the provision flips the fundamental right to privacy to protect the State, not citizens.
- Representatives of the investigative journalism community warn that the law could force journalists to obtain consent from data principals, hampering reporting.
Important Facts
The DPDP Act, enacted in 2023, defines “personal data” broadly and gives data principals the right to erase data. Public authorities can now refuse RTI requests if the information is deemed personal under the DPDP law, bypassing the discretion previously exercised by the Public Information Officer under the RTI Act.
The petitioners, including the Foundation for Media Professionals, contend that this creates a blanket exemption that could silence critical reporting and weaken the transparency framework established by the RTI Act.