PM CARES Fund Privacy has come into focus after the Delhi High Court made important observations on how privacy rights apply under the Right to Information (RTI) Act. The court said that even if the PM CARES Fund is assumed to be run or controlled by the government, it still enjoys privacy protection under the law. This clarification adds a new layer to the ongoing debate around transparency and disclosure related to the fund.

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

PM CARES Fund Privacy and the RTI Law

The Delhi High Court explained that the issue before it was not about the general or constitutional idea of privacy. Instead, it was about how privacy is defined within the RTI Act itself. The judges made it clear that the RTI Act contains specific rules that protect certain types of information from being shared with the public. These protections apply equally to all entities when they involve third-party information.

According to the court, the RTI Act does not remove privacy safeguards simply because an organisation is linked to the government or performs public functions. The law treats privacy in a balanced way, ensuring that transparency does not come at the cost of unfair disclosure.

What the Court Said About Privacy Protection

A Division Bench led by Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia clarified that the case revolves around Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. This section restricts the release of personal or sensitive information related to third parties. The judges said that this protection exists within the statute itself and is separate from broader privacy rights discussed in constitutional law.

The court stressed that statutory privacy applies uniformly. Whether the organisation involved is public or private does not change how this protection works. The aim is to prevent unnecessary exposure of information unless proper legal steps are followed.

No Difference Between Public and Private Trusts

One of the key points made by the Delhi High Court was that there is no difference between public and private trusts when it comes to privacy rights under the RTI Act. The judges noted that just because an organisation carries out public work or is managed by the government, it does not lose its separate legal identity.

Societies, trusts, and similar bodies continue to exist as independent legal entities. As a result, their third-party information cannot be disclosed automatically. The court underlined that privacy protection does not depend on labels like “public” or “private” but on the nature of the information and the legal process followed.

How the PM CARES Fund Case Reached the Court

The observations came during a hearing related to documents submitted by the PM CARES Fund to receive tax exemptions under the Income Tax Act. An RTI request had sought access to these documents. The Central Information Commission had earlier directed the Income Tax Department to share the information.

However, in January 2024, a single judge of the Delhi High Court set aside that direction. The judge ruled that provisions of the Income Tax Act take priority in such matters and prevent disclosure of tax-related documents. This decision was later challenged, leading to the current hearing before the Division Bench.

Clash Between Transparency and Confidentiality

At the heart of the dispute is the balance between public transparency and legal confidentiality. While the RTI Act promotes openness, other laws also exist to protect sensitive information. The court pointed out that the RTI Act itself recognises such limits and allows certain information to remain confidential.

The judges highlighted that these legal boundaries are important to maintain trust in institutions and ensure that laws are applied fairly.

Arguments and What Happens Next

RTI applicant Girish Mittal has challenged the earlier ruling, arguing that a charitable trust set up with government involvement should not claim privacy under the RTI Act. He believes the public has a right to know details related to such funds.

The Delhi High Court has scheduled the matter for further hearing on February 10. On that date, the Income Tax Department is expected to present its arguments. The case is likely to continue drawing attention as it touches on transparency, governance, and the limits of information sharing in public life.