II Year BBA LLB-SEMESTER IV

2nd Internal Assessment

PUBLIC LAW SKILLS

‘REPORT WRITING - LECTURE BY ADV. ARUN WIGHMAL ON DRAFTING

OF PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 32 AND 226 OF INDIAN CONSTITUTION’

&
PIL DRAFTING

NAME: Mudrika Baghla & Kartik Choudhary

DIVISION: B & D (respectively)
PRN: 22010126123 & 22010125356
BATCH: 2022-27

1
 REPORT WRITING ON GUEST LECTURE BY

ADV. ARUN WIGMAL

TOPIC: PUBLIC INTERST LITIGATION

2
 INTRODUCTION

A major aspect of a legal framework is considered to be public interest litigation, especially

when considered in the context of downtrodden groups in the society of India. Arun
Wighmal, throughout the talk, who is a respected legal practitioner and expert imparted his
knowledge on PIL. This report gives an overview of Arun Wighmals speech on Public
Interest Litigation which incorporates the background, goals and its implications.

SPEAKERS OVERVIEW

Advocate Arun Wighmal, who is the managing partner of Wighmal and Company in New
Delhi, holds expertise in multiple numbers of legal fields, which includes family law,
banking, arbitration, and consumer litigation. He has imparted contributions which not only
surface on his profession of law but goes beyond it; he has also contributed by giving guest
lectures at various prestigious universities.

CONSTITUTIONAL BACKGROUND

 ARTICLE 32: Article 32(2) states, "The right to petition the Supreme Court for
permission of the rights granted by this Part is guaranteed." In accordance with Article
32(2), the Supreme Court of India will have the authority to issue suitable headings,
requests, or writs, including those for habeas corpus, mandamus, disallowance, quo
warranto, and certiorari, to carry out any of the rights granted in this Part.

 This provision has made the highest court in the land the protector and guarantor of our
basic rights. This privilege can only be utilised in cases of breaches of fundamental rights
as outlined in Articles 12 through 35 of our Constitution. According to this Article, the
President may suspend the capacity to petition a court to safeguard our fundamental
rights. Consequently, the Supreme Court will be able to grant writs such as Habeas
corpus, Mandamus, Prohibition, Quo Warranto, and Certiorari, as well as directions,
orders, and directives.

3
 ARTICLE 226: Article 226, in contrast, empowers the High Courts to grant writs for any
reason, including the enforcing of fundamental rights. This article grants the High Courts
broad authority to issue writs that can be used to defend the rights of citizens, such as
habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, and quo warranto.

 It authorises the High Court to issue writs to enforce either ordinary legal right and
Fundamental Rights. The High Court's jurisdiction is substantially broader than that of the
Supreme Court. Article 32 permits us to petition the Supreme Court to uphold our
fundamental rights, whereas Article 226 permits us to petition the court to uphold both
our fundamental and constitutional rights. In the context of India, PIL is limited to
constitutional litigation and does not encompass civil litigation.1

 PIL in India has its origins in the efforts of two eminent Supreme Court judges, Bhagwati
and Iyer JJ, between the mid-1970s and the early 1980s.2 Modifications to the
requirements for locus standi, liberalisation of the procedures for submitting writ
petitions, and the establishment or expansion of fundamental rights were among the
modifications included.

 In The first case involving THE THREE JUDGES3, Justice Bhagwati stated that the
Court may hear a PIL if the petitioner is considered to be in a state of helpless.

 The Supreme Court ruled in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India 4 that audi alteram
partem and other natural justice principles should be complied with when determining
issues brought before it under Articles 32 and 226. The court ruled that the petitioner
should be given a fair and just opportunity to present their case before a decision is made.

 By filing a single PIL, the Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar 5 case resulted in the
release of 40,000 prisoners in Bihar and is a landmark decision on the subject. Advocate

1
Peiris, G.L., 1991. Public interest litigation in the Indian subcontinent: Current dimensions. International &
Comparative Law Quarrrterly, 40(11), pp.66-90.
2
The SSupreme Court: An Overview’’ in B.N. Kirppaal et al. (edss), Supreme but not Infallible: Essssays in
Hon. of the Supreme Court of India (New Delhi: OUP, 2000), pp.16–47.
3
S.P. Gupta vs President Of India And Ors, AIR 1982 SC 149
4
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1987) 1 SCC 248.
5
HUSSAINARA KHATOON v. STATE OF BIHAR, 1979 AIR 1369

4
 Chaubey explained that PIL can be invoked in instances where the public is affected,
even when a private individual submits a case for his or her own advantage.6

 The Supreme Court ruled in State of Uttar Pradesh v. Mohammad Naim7 that a writ
petition must meet three criteria: the petitioner must have a legal right that was invaded
upon or jeopardised; the invasion must be on a lawful request; and the petitioner must
have exhausted all other available legal remedies.

 The PIL is divided into two distinct categories: Representative and Citizen.
i. In the first scenario, a person stands in for those who are unable to complete the
task themselves.
ii. In the latter scenario, a person initiates legal proceedings as a member of society
who owes a public duty.8PIL, or Public Interest Litigation, aims to attain social
justice and has proven its effectiveness through precedent-setting rulings such as
the Vishakha case.9

 Public Interest Litigation is considered to be a sort of a tool that shall enable individuals
and a group of individuals to address social issues and/or defend their or others
constitutional rights by using the courts intervention powers. PIL is set apart due to its
public addressal aspect, which furthers to benefit the existing system and the society as a
whole and protect the rights of the ones who are not able to do so on their own, like the
marginalised sections of the society.

 PIL was originally used in the American law practice, most evidently so under Abraham
Chaz's advocacy. Equitable remedies and injunctive relief were majorly supported by
Chaz, as well as liberalised party joinder, due to his practice the definition of interest was
broadened, and made class action claims easier than it was ever before. Enforcing the
laws in our legal framework for public welfare, the society as a whole and ensuring
justice and equality for marginalised sections of the society was the primary goal of PIL.

6
Mohd. Ahmad Khan v. Shah Bano BegumAIR 1985 SC 945
7
State of UP v. Mohammed Naim (1964) 2 SCR 363.
8
Peiris, G.L., 1991. Public interest litigation in the Indian subcontinent: Current dimensions. International &
Comparative Law Quarterly, 40(1), pp.66-90.
9
Vishaka & Ors vs State Of Rajasthan & Ors , (Air 1997 Sc 3011), , M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India , AIR 1987
965

5
 In India Public Interest Litigation was a representation of a break from traditional court
cases, which held dual goals of aiming to reduce societal suffering, victims in the society
and being able to hold the government accountable for breaking the law and not abiding
by the Constitution of India. One of the major individualities of PIL was that of aiming to
close the gap between what the constitution guarantees and the reality of the citizens',
ensuring access to justice to all, primarily focusing on the economically disadvantaged
groups.

Articles 32 and 226 of the Indian Constitution gives PIL its origin in India, which particularly
gives the High Court and the Supreme Court, respectively, the right and authority to impart
writs which are used to enforce basic rights of the citizens of India. These provisions give
PIL a constitutional standing and allows the courts to get involved directly in any matter of
public interest cases that may come up.

PRECAUTIONS TO BE TAKEN WHILE DRAFTING

Due to the gravity of the issue, a petition under Article 32 or Article 226 of the Indian
Constitution must be submitted with extreme caution. Before submitting a petition, you must
observe the following precautions:

1. Determine the correct jurisdiction: Prior to filing the petition, it is crucial to determine
the Supreme Court's or High Court's legitimate jurisdiction in order to prevent the petition
being denied on the premise of technical issues.

2. Verify the facts: Prior to submitting a petition, it is essential to validate the facts in order
to ensure that everything that is included is accurate and supported by proof.

3. Compose a persuasive petition: The petition must be well-written, concise, and to the
point, and it must include all pertinent facts and supporting evidence.

4. Hire a qualified advocate: It is advisable to design and submit the petition with the
assistance of a constitutional law-savvy attorney.

5. Follow court requirements: File the petition in accordance with all court requirements,
including the rules governing its format, filing fees, and deadline.

6
 a. Before filing a petition under Article 32 or Article 226, the petitioner must have
tried all other available options, such as filing a complaint or an appeal with the
right body.
b. The petitioner should show respect for the court by not making unfounded or
frivolous claims.
c. Whether the petition is about an infringement of fundamental rights or another
legal issue, it is important to find the right cause of action before presenting it.

6. Observe the deadline: To prevent your petition from being rejected on technical
grounds, you must be aware of the deadline for submitting a petition pursuant to Article
32 or Article 226.Certain actions may enhance a petitioner's odds of success when
submitting a petition pursuant to Article 32 or Article 226.

1. There may be dates of events that are unfavourable to the petitioner on occasion. However,
they must be presented in a manner that strengthens their argument in the List of Dates.

2. The petitioner must not withhold any relevant documents, as doing so could provide an
advantage to the opposing party and be used to cast doubt on the petitioner's integrity.

3. The outcome of the PIL should have no bearing on any other cases pursued by the petition.
This statement should be classified as a commitment paragraph.

4. The subject matter of the PIL should not be absurd, such as the whereabouts of Subhash
Chandra Bose or the real history of the Taj Mahal, as this would squander the court's time.

5. The petitioner should be aware of the proper timing for petitioning either the Supreme
Court or the High Court. Parties may appeal to the Supreme Court in cases involving the
entire country, a significant portion of the nation, or two or more states. The High Court is
available to individuals with cases pertaining to particular subject areas.

6. It is crucial to include references to the constituent assembly and the debates surrounding
the constitution in matters pertinent to the constitution. It increases the significance of the
document.

7
7. In a Public Interest Litigation (PIL), the petitioner is restricted to using only publicly
available information, as a citizen is not permitted to possess additional information. Their
argument must be substantiated by favourable evidence.

8. One of the most important aspects of the PIL format is that the heading and prayer should
correspond.

9. In the body of the writ, the petitioner is prohibited from advocating for their individual
case under the pretence of a PIL, per paragraph 1a.It is required that they include a paragraph
stating that they have no personal interest or private motive in submitting the document.

10. In addition, the petitioner must include specifics regarding how they have been wronged
and present their argument with factual evidence that accurately reflects their position and
case, while the Reasons are an expansion of the Synopsis.

PARTS OF THE PETITION

8
The parts of the petition in a PIL typically include:

The essential parts of a petition submitted under Article 32 or Article 226 are described in
further detail below.

• TITLE - The title of the petition must identify the petitioner, the respondent, and the
problem raised. Consider the following as an example: "Petition under Article 32 of the
Constitution of India by XYZ, an Indian citizen, contrary to the Union of India, requesting
protection of the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression."

• PARTIES - The petition must identify both the petitioner and the respondent, as well as
provide information about their relationship. To be able to demonstrate locus standi, or legal
standing, an applicant must explicitly lose something as a consequence of the violation of a
fundamental right.

• JURISDICTION - For the court to review the petition, the petition must demonstrate that
the court has jurisdiction. When submitting a petition pursuant to Article 32, the petitioner
must demonstrate that the fundamental right was violated and that the issue is of public
concern.

•KEY FACTS - The petition must include a comprehensive description of the events that led
to the infringement of a fundamental right. The information must be presented sequentially

9
and supported by relevant evidence. In addition, the facts should describe how the violation
of the petitioner's fundamental rights has impacted his or her specific circumstances.

• LISTING PROFORMA: The third section of the petition is the Listing Proforma. Using
fundamental information, the Listing Proforma categorises matters for the Registry. The
petitioner must ascertain the classification of the case. -
i. Section:
ii. Central Rule:
iii. Rule Numbers
iv. Section:
v. Rule of the State:
vi. Rule No(s):
vii. Impugned Interim order:
viii. Contestable Final Order:
ix. High Court.
x. Judges' identities
xi. Tribunal/authority.

• SYNOPSIS: The Synopsis is the most important section of the fourth section of a petition.
Due to excessive volume, courts cannot examine each case in depth. A compelling summary
can pique the bench's interest and lead to a more in-depth case examination.

• CAUSE OF ACTION - The petition must specify the reason for its request or the principal
cause of action. The petitioner asserts that a transgression or prospect of a violation of a
fundamental right must have occurred. The claim must be supported by court decisions,
statutes, and constitutional provisions.

• REASONS FOR RELIEF - The petitioner must also enumerate the reasons why the
proposed remedy is necessary. Legislation, constitutional provisions, and precedents may all
be included in this category.

• PRAYERS - The petition must end with a prayer or a concise statement of the remedy
sought and the reasons for it. The remedy requested by the court must be specified in detail in

10
the concise prayer. The Prayer should be formulated with care to accommodate novel
approaches that may emerge during conflicts.

• VERIFICATION - Either the petitioner or someone authorised by that individual has to

sign and verify the petition. To the best of the petitioner's knowledge and belief, the
verification must attest to the veracity and accuracy of the facts and assertions mentioned in
the petition.

• ATTACHMENTS - The petition may include annexes or attachments that provide

germane documents and evidence to support the petitioner's claims. The annexures must be
accurately identified and numbered.

Procedural Aspects and Practices Involved

11
Intervention Application - If a second party has an interest in the same PIL.

THE PIL APPLICATION PROCESS:

1. Identify the cause of action: A cause of action is a collection of evidence that gives rise to
a legal claim. In a PIL, the underlying cause of action must involve a matter of public
interest.

2. Determine the proper court: PILs may be lodged with the Supreme Court or the High
Court.

3. Compose the petition: The petition must be drafted in a prescribed format and include
information about the petitioner, respondent, cause of action, and relief sought.

4. Filing the petition: The petition, along with an affidavit and supporting documents, must
be lodged with the court.

5. Admission of petition: After evaluating the petition's merits, the court may grant or deny
admission.

6. Notice to the respondent: If the court grants the petition, notice is sent to the respondent
and the respondent is permitted to file a response.

7. Hearing: The presiding judge will listen to the arguments of both sides and may issue any
necessary orders or directives.

8. Petition disposition: The court may dispose of the petition by issuing an order or
direction, or by dismissing the petition if it is found to be frivolous or without merit.

PIL PROCEDURE SAFEGUARDS:

1. Locus standi: In a typical civil or criminal case, only the aggrieved party can file suit. In
contrast, in a PIL, anyone may submit a case as long as it pertains to a matter of public
interest. The Supreme Court has established the concept of 'public interest standing' to
determine whether a petitioner has the right to register a PIL.

2. Certification by lawyer: Before a PIL can be lodged, it must be certified by an attorney

who has practised in the relevant profession for at least five years.

12
3. Public Interest Litigation Fund: The Supreme Court has established a fund to finance
PILs lodged by individuals who cannot afford legal representation.

4. Strict examination by the court: To prevent their misuse for personal or political gain,
the court examines PILs with strictness.

FUNDAMENTAL STATUTE:

1. No personal interest for the individual

2. This PIL or its conclusion will have no consequence on any other PIL to which I am a
party.

STRONGEST CRITICISM:

1. Occasionally, courts exceed their authority.

2. Presently, a deluge of PILs are being filed, such as in 2014 when an advocate filed a PIL
inquiring about the whereabouts of Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose, wasting court time and
resources.

CONCLUSION

Critics have elaborated that PILs are frequently misapplied for political or private gain.
Numerous cases are filed with ambiguous petitions and false claims, resulting in a backlog of
cases and delays in resolving matters that truly involve the public interest. The PIL procedure
allows anyone, including those with no direct interest in the outcome, to submit a case,
resulting in cases that lack accountability, resulting in a lack of transparency and systemic
abuse. The advocates' speeches were enlightening and instructive. The sample petition
regarding the election commission was thoroughly explained, leaving no room for doubt. The
author is appreciative of the opportunity to learn about and critically evaluate PIL
components with professionals, gaining once more first-hand knowledge of PIL components
and drafting expertise.

The lectures emphasised the significance of PIL in India's advancement of social justice.
It has given expression to marginalised groups and individuals, exposed dishonesty, and
safeguarded the fundamental principles of equality and democracy. The lectures
13
accentuated the importance of including key components in a well-written PIL, such as a
plain statement of the facts, applicable legal requirements, and a targeted and achievable
request for relief supported by accompanying papers and annexures. The PIL must be
persuasive, concise, and consistent with the public's best interests. Overall, the lectures
illustrated the significance of PIL for promoting social justice and safeguarding individual
rights.

Finally, PILs have evolved into a potent tool in the hands of individuals for safeguarding their
fundamental rights and advancing the public welfare. To ensure the success of a PIL and to
further the cause of justice, it is essential, however, to adhere to the appropriate procedures
and practises when preparing one.

14
 REPORT WRITING ON GUEST LECTURE BY

ADV. ARUN WIGMAL

TOPIC: PUBLIC INTERST LITIGATION

SYNOPSIS AND LIST OF DATES

15
 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
16
 WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO 1722 OF 2024
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION
(UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA)

IN THE MATTER OF:

1. Common Good,
Through its director: Kartik Singh
NM Marg, Vasant Kunj
New Delhi………………………………………………………………Petitioner

Versus

1. Union of India
Through the Secretary,
Ministry of Electronics
Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi, ..………………………………………….Respondents

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION UNDER ARTICLE 32 AGAINST SHARING OF

CITIZENS PERSONAL DATA COLLECTED BY FOREIGN TRAVEL COMPANIES

To,
THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA
AND LORDSHIPS COMPANION JUSTICES
OF THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
HUMBLE PETITION OF THE ABOVE-MENTIONED PETITIONER

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

17
 1. That the Petitioner is filing the present writ petition under Article 32 of the
Constitution in public interest for the centre to take steps to ensure that the travel
companies particularly Foreign Travel Companies which collect personal data during
the ticket booking process are totally confidential and are not shared with anyone.
2. It is submitted that the Petitioner has no personal interest in the litigation and that the
petition is not guided by self-gain or for gain of any other person/institution/body and
that there is no motive other than of public interest in filing the writ petition. The
Petitioner is filing the present petition in public interest as the aforesaid practice is not
just breach of personal privacy but is also violative of the fundamental right under
Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
3. That all the facts mentioned in the writ petition are based on the documents available
in public domain and most of them have been downloaded from the internet. The
Petitioner has made a representation to the Government vide its letter dated
31.05.2013
4.Petitioner No. 1 herein is the Common Good Society that was founded in the 1994 for
the purpose of voicing the common problems of the general public & securing
resolution for them. It has established its reputation as a public interest organization
fighting for public good and for a transparent & protected system where the rights of
the individuals are protected and the one’s infringing are held accountable. The
petitioner has no personal interest, or private/oblique motive in filing the instant
petition. There is no civil, criminal, revenue or any litigation involving the petitioners,
which has or could have a legal nexus with the issues involved in the PIL.
5.The Respondent is Union of India, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of
Electronics, the Ministry concerned with the subject matter of the present writ
petition.
6.Article 32 of the Constitution of India confers the power in a wider range of terms and
provisions and is not strictly restricted to issuing the exclusive writs mentioned
therein, but also includes under its umbrella the power to issue any directions or
orders or writs that may be right for the implementation of fundamental rights. In
situations where the principles or the strict criteria might not be met for the issuance
of writs, the Supreme Court is not considered to be helpless or confined to any sort of
action. The court shall not hesitate to indulge itself where an individual is trying to
seek justice especially in the instances of violation of the right to life and personal
liberty. It is the duty of the court to be innovative to provide solutions and remedies to
18
 combat such violations of citizens fundamental rights or legal rights. To safeguard the
Fundamental Rights given by the Constitution of India, namely, Article 21, the
Supreme Court holds a duty and holds an authority as well to safeguard the civil
rights of the citizens. Further, Article 32 and 142 gives the court the power to make
sure that justice is served to all and is accessible by all. Article 144 ensures that all the
authorities in the country of India is supposed to assist in implementing the Supreme
Courts’ orders. The Supreme Court and the High Courts, considered to be the
guardians of justice, hold an immense amount of power towards judicial review to
ensure the safeguarding of its citizens rights. This power as well as the duty was
emphasised in the case of M.L. Sharma (2014) 2 SCC 532, to uphold justice and
ensure the protection of the rights of the Indian citizens.
7.The prerogative of approaching the Supreme Court is not only a privilege for the
citizens; it also constitutes a duty on the Court to safeguard and uphold the
fundamental rights of the individuals. Further, if the petitioner proves to the court that
there has been an infringement of his fundamental rights, then it is not only the duty
of the court or its power but its obligation to ensure that the infringed rights of the
individual are restored or there is a compensation in place.10
8.As was noted in the case of M. Nagraj v. Union of India, 11 using the phrase ‘in the
nature of’ the jurisdiction of the supreme court is now widened, apart from the
issuance of writs, its authority and its powers have been noted in a much wider sense.
The phrase made a distinction to the nature of the court as was earlier denoted by the
phrase ‘of the nature of.’
9.The Supreme Court cannot refuse any application made under Article 31 merely on the
grounds: i.) that such application has been made to Supreme Court in the first instance
without resort to the High Court under Article 226. ii.) that there is some adequate
alternative remedy available to the petitioner. iii.) that the application involves an
inquiry into disputed questions of fact iv.) that declaratory relief i.e., declaration as to
unconstitutionality of impugned statute together with consequential relief, has been
prayed for v.) that the proper writ or direction has not been paid for in the application
vi.) that the common writ law must be modified to give proper relief to the applicant. 12
vii.) that the Article in part three of the Constitution, which is alleged to have been

10
Ramchandran, Law of Writs, 6ht Edition, 2006, Pg. 131, Vol-1
11
M. Nagraj v. UOI (2006) 8 SCC 212
12
Kochunni v. State of Madras, AIR 1959 SC 725 (729)

19
 infringed, has not been specifically mentioned in petition, if the facts stated therein,
entitle the petitioner to invoke particular article.13
10. In another case, the Supreme Court held: “the fundamental right to move this Court
can therefore be described as the corner stone of the democratic edifice raised by
Constitution. That is why it is natural that the Court should regard itself as the
protector and guarantor of fundamental rights and should declare that it cannot
consistently with the responsibility led upon it, refuse to entertain application seeking
protection against infringement of such right. In discharging the duties assigned to it,
the Court must play the role of a “sentinel on the qui vive” and it must always regard
it as its solemn duty to protect the said fundamental right zealously and vigilantly.”14
11. The Petitioners have filed the instant Public Interest Litigation under Article 21 of the
Constitution of India on the issue of data protection & privacy, Against Sharing of
Citizens Personal Data Collected by Foreign Travel Companies. The petitioners are
seeking directions from this Hon'ble Court to introduce a comprehensive
administrative and legal framework to ensure the protection of personal data across
the wide spectrum of both domestic and international businesses and to make the
provisions under the Digital Personal Data Protection Act more stringent & to issue
guidelines for not just domestic entities but also international businesses carrying out
their activities in India. The data privacy laws need to be tightened to ensure the
robustness of their implementation to address challenges arising from businesses
handling large volumes of personal data.

QUESTIONS OF LAW

 Is the process of collecting & sharing of personal information by the foreign travel
companies violative of the fundamental right to privacy guaranteed under Article 21
of the Indian Constitution?
 Is the DPDP Act applicable to the data collection practices of foreign travel companies
operating in India?
 In cases of data transfer outside the territory of India, do we have adequate safeguards

in place to make sure that it is safe & in compliance with the DPDP Act, 2023?

13
PTI v. UOI, AIR 1974, SC 1044
14
Prem Chand Garg, AIR 1963 SC 996

20
 FACTS OF THE CASE CONSTITUTING CAUSE OF ACTION

12. The Cause of Action emanated from the very instances that have
happened in the past & will most likely repeat in the future if proper
amendments are not introduced and proper provisions are not
inserted, In the instance where the data relating to an infant’s
adoptive parents was sent to the biological parents without removing
the names and addresses of the adoptive parents, after this breach
was discovered the adoptive parents were not informed about the leak
of their personal information. This leak of their personal information
poses a volatile risk to the adoptive parents safety and their lives. In
furtherance of this situation, the birth parents had decided to take a
visit to the adoptive parents home and had to be removed forcefully by
the police and due to the leak of their address they had to relocate to
another home to prevent this from happening again in the near future
which solely disrupted their entire life that they had built and not to
mention their social settings had also been disrupted. When the
personal information of the adoptive parents was leaked to the
biological parents, the adoptive parents should have been informed
about the same at the instance it was discovered. This would’ve given
the adoptive parents to take measures to minimise the risk as much
as possible or they at least would have been informed about the
breach that their personal information has been leaked to someone
who were not authorised to be knowledgeable of the information. They
would have had the opportunity to relocate perhaps, before the
biological parents of the child decided to take a visit and would not
leave until the police forcefully told them to do so.
13. In another instance where an agent of debt insolvency mailed a
financially weak clients report to a colleague from another department
from the same agency, the colleague who had received the mail
containing the said report immediately deleted the mail sent by the
agent and made sure that the agent who sent the mail was aware of
the error he had made. This was considered to be of great importance

21
 because it mentioned the clients debts that had to be paid, his other
personal details like – his contact details, his mental health
background and the reason due to which he had taken the debt. This
resulted in a leak of his personal details which was entrusted with the
organisation and could have further lead to misuse of the same
information resulting in a breach of his privacy and personal details.
14. The Petitioner submits that sharing of citizens personal data collected by foreign
companies brings up privacy and security risks which includes issues such as-use of
data which includes personal details such as name, passport information, residence
address that are of great importance and are valuable information to people
committing crimes. Information of this sort may be used for identity theft, opening
fake bank accounts, and this may lead to misuse of the victim’s personal information.
It is known that travel companies have the pleasure to access peoples bank account
information while making bookings, if this information slips into the hands of some
unwanted people, it may give them a chance to use this information for financial
scams or misuse. Another issue that the petitioner has brought forward is the misuse
of information for targeted advertising where the information may be used to build
profiles with intense details for the aim to target the audience based on user data,
which is believed to be intrusive on many levels.
15. The petitioner further submits another issue which entails to Data Protection Laws
and their Compliance, in furtherance of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act,
2023 (DPDP Act), a novel data protection law in India which may not be complied
with by the foreign travel agencies while pursuing the personal information of Indian
citizens. According to Section 3 of the said act, it applies to the processing of digital
data both within & outside the territory of India if goods or services are provided to
data principals in Indian territory. Further the Central governmental must seek
clarification regarding the measures in place for data protection by the foreign
companies especially those based overseas. The petitioner highlighted that the DPDP
Act places an obligation on any requests for consent made to a data principal to be
preceded by a notice informing the data principal about the personal data being
processed, it’s purpose and the procedure for exercising rights and filing complaints
from the data fiduciary. Section 8 of the concerned act mandates the data fiduciaries
to make sure that the personal data is complete, accurate & consistent and it is their

22
 duty to notify the board and the data principles affected by it in cases of breach. It is
also asserted that the fiduciaries are also mandated to appoint a data protection officer
based in India. Section 11 of the DPDP Act also gives the data principals the right to
obtain a precis of their personal data, its use, and the identities of everyone with
whom the data has been shared including all the data fiduciaries and processors.
16. The petitioner further submits that in a situation where the data is breached or leaked
at a foreign travel agency it may strike a problem to hold the foreign travel agency
accountable. As the provisions of the India legal framework like the DPDP Act 2023,
due to the jurisdiction limitations, may not be applicable to the country in which the
foreign travel agency lies. This situation poses a dilemma under 2 major horizons, the
misuse of such crucial personal information & the lack of being able to hold the travel
agency accountable due to jurisdiction limitations. Further, the National Security
concerns, the potential risk of foreign government getting access to the personal data
of Indian citizens or Indian officials through travel agencies, keeping in mind that
these foreign travel agencies could be fully or partially owned by the foreign
governments and could put such information to use for their national benefit. This
poses a risk to the national security of our country by the misuse of such detailed
personal information of Indian citizens or the officials of India, whose information is
confidential in the home country itself for the sake of national security and
confidentiality. It is stated that the foreign travel companies not just collect the
information of the common man but also personal data of ministers, law makers,
judges, civil servants their family members etc. Along with that almost all big travel
companies performing their operations in india are owned by foreign investors that
also raises concerns regarding potential misuse of information especially Aadhar &
passport details.
17. In the landmark judgement of Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India
(2017),15 privacy was also established as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the
Indian Constitution, hence the same needs to be protected and any violations on the
same need to be curbed by bringing in amendments in the present laws or by
implementing measures based on the same. Similarly In the dissenting judgment of
the Supreme Court, Kharak Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 16 right to privacy was

15
K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, 2015 SCC OnLine SC 1640
16
Kharak Singh v. State of U.P., 1962 SCC OnLine SC 10

23
 again recognized as a fundamental right under Articles 21 and 19(1)(d) of the
Constitution of India.
18. The draft National e-Commerce Policy, 2019 states that an individual owns the right
to their data which can be used only with his/her express consent. Even anonymised
data of a group of individuals is the collective property of the group. It is stated by the
petitioners that the data generated in India belongs to Indians & therefore the same is
a “national asset.” Any use of personal information without the person’s consent is
illegal & hence there should be proper laws in place to prohibit the foreign travel
companies from doing so.
19. Aadhar was originally sold as an Indian version of the Social Security Code but was
later revamped as a means to efficiently avail government subsidies. However, now
that Aadhaar is used for various government transactions, it is “an amorphous and
leaky agglomeration of databases,” connecting names, faces, and prints to their
demographic (caste, education, religion, etc.) and financial data (banking details,
online purchases, wallet transfer, etc). Foreign Companies using the data hence
violate the rights of Indian citizens under Article 51 and contravene the sovereign
duties of the government to protect its people from foreign assault and intrusion.

GROUNDS
A. That the potential risks to privacy & the threats that personal information leak can
cause are against the fundamental right granted to the citizens under Article 21 of the
constitution, even though the same is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, the
courts have upheld the same in the landmark case of K.S. Puttuswamy v. Union Of
India17 & various other cases as well.
B. That there have been various instances of personal information misuse by almost all
online platforms such as WhatsApp, Facebook etc and the same has hit the news and
amendments have been introduced in to the DPDP Act but still the act lacks
provisions regarding potential misuse of such information by specific entities such as
travel companies that collect data such as name, address, Aadhar, passport details etc.
C. That even though Section 3 of the DPDP Act extends its jurisdiction to handling
digital data within India, regardless of where it is processesd it is still difficult to hold
foreign companies carrying on their businesses in India accountable for the misuse of
personal information that it seeks from its users.
17
K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, 2015 SCC OnLine SC 1640

24
 D. That there is a need for businesses to comply with data protection laws and the
potential reputational risks associated with the mishandling of personal data. For
policymakers, this case is a reminder to tighten data privacy laws and ensure the
robustness of their implementation to address challenges arising from businesses
handling large volumes of personal data.
E. That not all foreign companies are in compliance with the DPDP Act, 2023 rules &
that without providing explicit or informed consent to use and share the data, the same
is being done as almost all major companies have unclear privacy policies and that
data transfers to countries with weaker data privacy laws are happening without
adequate safeguards.
F. That as was previously outlined almost all major foreign travel companies carrying on
business in India have foreign investors as their maximum shareholders making it
easier for the foreign governments to access personal data of Indian citizens through
travel companies leading to a risk on national security.

PRAYER

25
In view of the above grounds and submissions, Petitioner most respectfully prays that this Hon’ble
Court may be pleased to:

a) Direct the Centre to take steps to ensure that the Travel Companies, particularly
Foreign Travel Companies, which collect personal data - Name, Address, Phone
Number, AADHAAR, Passport Details etc during ticket booking are totally
confidential and not shared with anyone.
b) Pass such other directions as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper to secure the
Citizen’s Data in spirit of the DPDP Act 2023.

Petitioner

Through Counsel For The Petitioner

KARTIK CHOUDHARY & MUDRIKA BAGHLA

26