Question

Assertion (A): The right to privacy has been judicially recognised as an integral part of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Reason (R): Privacy is expressly enumerated as a separate Fundamental Right in Part III of the Constitution of India. In the context of the Constitution of India and the decision in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India (2017), which one of the following is correct?

• A. (A) is false, but (R) is true.
• B. Both (A) and (R) are true, but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A).
• C. Both (A) and (R) are true, and (R) is the correct explanation of (A).
• D. (A) is true, but (R) is false.

Hint:

Do not confuse a right being Fundamental with being expressly written. Privacy is a Fundamental Right because the Supreme Court interpreted it from Articles 14, 19 and 21.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is D

Concept: The judgment in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India (2017) is one of the most important constitutional decisions in India. A nine-judge bench unanimously declared that the right to privacy is a Fundamental Right protected by the Constitution.

Step 1: Examining Assertion (A).

• Article 21 guarantees the right to life and personal liberty.

• The Supreme Court held that privacy is intrinsic to human dignity, liberty, and autonomy.

• Therefore, privacy forms an integral part of Article 21.

• Hence, Assertion (A) is

true.

Step 2: Examining Reason (R).

• The Constitution does not contain any separate article explicitly titled ``Right to Privacy.''

• Privacy has been judicially interpreted and derived from Articles 14, 19, and 21.

• Therefore, it is a Fundamental Right through constitutional interpretation, not through express textual enumeration.

• Hence, Reason (R) is

false.

Step 3: Final conclusion.

• Assertion is true.

• Reason is false.

• Therefore option (D) is correct.

Privacy is a constitutionally protected Fundamental Right, but it is not expressly mentioned as a separate article in Part III. \[ \boxed{\text{Correct Answer = (D)}} \]

Answer 2

This is an Assertion-Reason question, so the four options are simply the four possible logical combinations of the Assertion (A) and Reason (R) being true or false, and whether R explains A. Working out the truth of A and R independently, then testing whether R actually accounts for A, resolves it directly.

1. Option 1 (A is false, R is true): A, that the right to privacy has been judicially recognised as part of Article 21, is a settled constitutional position, the nine-judge bench in the Puttaswamy case confirmed exactly this. Since A cannot be treated as false, this option fails at the first test.
2. Option 2 (both true, R does not explain A): This requires R to be a true statement on its own. R claims privacy is expressly listed as a separate fundamental right in Part III. Part III's articles run through equality, various freedoms, protection in respect of conviction, life and personal liberty, and onward, and none of them is headed as a standalone "right to privacy." Since R is not true, this option cannot be correct.
3. Option 3 (both true, R correctly explains A): This fails for the same reason as Option 2, R is not a true statement to begin with, since privacy is not expressly written into Part III as its own article, so it cannot serve as a correct explanation of anything.
4. Option 4 (A is true, R is false): A holds because the Court read privacy into the guarantee of life and personal liberty under Article 21, reinforced by Articles 14 and 19. R fails because the constitutional text nowhere sets out privacy as an independently named fundamental right, it was reached through interpretation, not express drafting. Both halves of this option match what actually happened.

Since A is a true, judicially settled statement and R misdescribes the constitutional text by claiming an express enumeration that does not exist, the fourth combination fits.

The correct answer is (A) is true, but (R) is false.