New Delhi (Agency): On Friday, India’s Supreme Court began examining the concerns related to a recent caste survey in Bihar, wondering what the harm would be if a person’s specific caste details are not going to be published by the state.
The issue began with the decision of the Patna High Court on August 1, which allowed the Bihar government to proceed with a caste survey. Several petitions have challenged this decision, claiming that the survey violates people’s right to privacy.
A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and SVN Bhatti posed the question to the senior advocate CS Vaidyanathan, who was representing the NGO ‘Youth for Equality.’ They asked, “If someone gives the name of his caste or sub-caste, and if that data is not published, then what is the harm. What is being sought to be released is cumulative figures. How does that affect the right to privacy?”
The Bihar government completed the caste survey on August 6 and uploaded the data by August 12. The data, now stored on the BIJAGA (Bihar Jaati Adharit Ganana) app, will be shared with different departments for analysis, but individual data will remain private.
Senior advocate Shyam Divan, representing the Bihar government, emphasized that if individual data is not to be released, then the concern over privacy should not be an issue.
During the hearing, Justice Khanna noted that in Bihar, a person’s caste is generally known to neighbors, unlike in a city like Delhi. This comment hinted at the existing cultural differences related to caste awareness in different regions.
Vaidyanathan argued that the right to privacy cannot be violated without a fair, just, and reasonable law, citing a previous ruling in 2017. He contended that there was no specific law supporting the caste survey, only an executive order, and claimed that the survey infringed on people’s rights under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution.
The bench responded that the caste survey notification was an administrative decision and did not need detailed public justification. They also noted that there was no penalty if the public chose not to provide the requested details.
Vaidyanathan further pointed out that all 17 questions in the survey were made mandatory, except for the Aadhaar number, and insisted that anything related to caste is a matter of privacy.
Another petition filed by Nalanda resident Akhilesh Kumar argued that the exercise was unconstitutional, as only the Union government has the authority to conduct a census. The high court, in its 101-page verdict, however, found the action of the state to be “perfectly valid.”
The Supreme Court has adjourned the hearing until August 21, offering time for other advocates to present their cases.
The case highlights a complex intersection between government policy, personal privacy, and social norms in India. With the caste system deeply ingrained in Indian society, the debate over the Bihar caste survey raises essential questions about the role of government, the rights of individuals, and the dynamics of caste in the modern Indian state.
