LAWS(KER)-2020-2-34

JYOTHIKUMAR CHAMAKKALA Vs. STATE OF KERALA

Decided On February 24, 2020
Jyothikumar Chamakkala Appellant
V/S
STATE OF KERALA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayers :-

(2.) Heard the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader as well as the learned counsel appearing for the 8th respondent society.

(3.) The petitioner, a resident of Kollam district, who is a social and political worker has approached this Court to protect his privacy, which according to him, is sought to be violated by the W.P.(C).No.35069/19 actions of the Sate and the Police. The contention in the writ petition is that the State Police has a fully developed computer centre with highly qualified Engineers and experts, which is responsible for maintaining the crime records under the State crime record wing. It is contended that the Department maintains details, known as crime data, which is in the possession of the police and are in the realm of privacy of the citizen. It is contended that vide letter issued on 23.01.2019 and order dated 29.10.2019, a decision had been taken to grant access to the Crime and Criminal Tracking Network and Systems (CCTNS for short) application to the team of the 8 th respondent which had been entrusted with the development of the application for processing of passport applications. It is contended that as a consequence, by Exhibit P1, the 8 th respondent will be enabled to have access to the entire criminal data available in the system preserved by the State, which amounts to sale of data and is therefore illegal. It is stated that Exhibit P2 order has been passed in November 2019 with regard to payment for Proof of Concept (PoC for short) application for speedy verification of passport W.P.(C).No.35069/19 applications by the 8th respondent for meeting the expenses for the cost of PoC development and deployment from the incentive claim received from the Ministry of External Affairs. Exhibit P3, which is purported to be the transcript of proceedings of the Legislature are also produced in support of the contention that the parting of data under the CCTNS would be a serious infringement on the right of privacy.