Decode Civils CAShorts
Current affairs Open app
ExplainerPolityGS2Prelims

Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act and its DPDP amendment

By CAShorts DeskPublished Sources: Gazette of India (DPDP Act, 2023, Section 44); PIB; 24Law; LawBeat; Supreme Court Observer

Why in news: On 7 August 2026 the Supreme Court gave the Centre two weeks to reply to petitions challenging the DPDP Act's rewrite of RTI Section 8(1)(j).

Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act and its DPDP amendment
Illustration (AI-generated)

Section 8(1)(j) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 lets authorities withhold personal information. It once covered only information unrelated to public activity or interest, or whose disclosure unwarrantedly invaded privacy. Section 44(3) of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 cut it to "information which relates to personal information". Petitions against the change await a Supreme Court larger Bench.

Syllabus: GS2 · Constitution; Prelims · Polity & Governance; GS4 · Probity in Governance

Why this matters for UPSC

GS2 governance and polity (RTI, transparency, fundamental rights): Prelims can ask what Section 8 of the RTI Act exempts and what the DPDP Act changed; Mains, how Article 19(1)(a) is balanced against privacy under Article 21.

In short

Section 8(1)(j) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 exempts personal information from disclosure; its rewriting by the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 reopens the transparency-privacy balance.

How Section 8(1)(j) evolvedRight to Information Act, 2005Puttaswamy ruling, 2017Subhash Chandra Agarwal, 2019DPDP Act, 2023Larger Bench reference, 2026

Privacy deserves protection, but the larger Bench should keep officials' public acts disclosable, so that Section 8(1)(j) shields private lives, not public power.

Why it matters

Picture a villager checking who got houses under a welfare scheme, or a citizen asking whether a local official faces a charge sheet. Both requests seek names, which is personal information. Under the old clause, an officer had to ask whether the information touched public activity or served a larger public interest before refusing. Petitioners argue that the new one-line clause lets an officer refuse simply because a name is involved, weakening social audits and checks on officials. The other side is real too: people listed in government files are entitled to privacy under Article 21. The case will decide how India balances the citizen's right to know against the individual's right to be left alone.

Prelims pointers

  • RTI Act, Section 8(2): a public authority may allow access, notwithstanding the Official Secrets Act, 1923 or Section 8(1), if public interest outweighs harm.
  • RTI Act, Section 7(1): information within 30 days of the request; within 48 hours where it concerns the life or liberty of a person.
  • RTI Act, Section 8(3): information on events twenty years old must be given, subject to clauses (a), (c) and (i) of Section 8(1).
  • Central Information Commission (Section 12): Chief Information Commissioner and up to ten Information Commissioners, appointed by the President.
  • Selection committee for Information Commissioners: the Prime Minister (chair), the Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha and a Union Cabinet Minister nominated by the Prime Minister.
  • RTI Act, Section 20: penalty on an information officer of Rs 250 a day, up to Rs 25,000.
  • DPDP Act, 2023: Data Fiduciaries handle personal data; Data Principals are the individuals; appeals from the Data Protection Board of India lie with TDSAT.
  • Puttaswamy (24 August 2017): nine judges held privacy protected as an intrinsic part of life and personal liberty under Article 21.

Practise a UPSC-style question

With reference to Section 8(1)(j) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, consider the following statements:

1. Its present text was substituted by Section 44(3) of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023.

2. The substituted clause keeps the test that the information has no relationship to any public activity or interest.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

  1. (a) 1 only
  2. (b) 2 only
  3. (c) Both 1 and 2
  4. (d) Neither 1 nor 2
Show the answer

Answer: (a) 1 only

1 is correct: Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act, 2023 substituted clause (j) of Section 8(1). 2 is incorrect: the new clause reads only "information which relates to personal information"; the public-activity test was dropped.

More Explainers

All Explainers

More Polity current affairs