India Supreme Court: Refuses Interim Stay on DPDP Act

• The Supreme Court of India refused to grant an interim stay on the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, and its rules.
• The Digital News Publishers Association challenged the Act, arguing it violates press freedom and could lead to newsroom closures.
• The CJI Surya Kant bench declined an ex parte order, stating the opposing side must be heard first.
• The court is also examining broader challenges to the Act, particularly its amendment to the RTI Act, which allegedly weakens the right to information.
• The Union government has been directed to file its response justifying the legislative amendments.

The Supreme Court of India has declined to issue an interim stay on the provisions of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, and the accompanying DPDP Rules, 2025.

The Supreme Court of India has declined to issue an interim stay on the provisions of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, and the accompanying DPDP Rules, 2025. This decision came during a hearing on a plea filed by the Digital News Publishers Association, which argues that the legislation infringes upon press freedom. A bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant firmly stated that it would not issue an ex parte order without first hearing from the opposing side, thereby refusing the petitioners' request for an immediate injunction against the impugned provisions.

Senior Advocate Madhavi Divan, representing the Digital News Publishers Association, urged the court to halt the implementation of the provisions, warning that newsrooms could face closure if they are required to seek permission before reporting. She highlighted that the Association represents traditional, legacy media organizations and emphasized that the deletion of Section 8(1)(j) fundamentally alters the concept of news reporting. Divan contended that requiring consent from a data principal before publishing information would make timely news reporting, especially live broadcasts, impossible. Despite these concerns, the bench maintained its stance against granting any such orders at this stage. The CJI, however, suggested that the petitioners, as domain experts, are best positioned to offer solutions to the Union government and the court on how to prevent misuse of information.

The Digital News Publishers Association's plea specifically challenges the Digital Personal Data Protection Act 2023 and DPDP Rules 2025 on grounds of violating press freedom. Divan further pointed out that journalists are already subject to various regulatory frameworks, including the Cable Television framework, uplinking and downlinking regulations, IT Rules, and the Press Council. The core of their argument revolves around the potential for the Act to stifle the free flow of information essential for news dissemination, particularly concerning the requirement for consent from individuals whose personal data might be part of a news story.

This challenge is part of a broader set of petitions the Supreme Court is currently considering, which contest provisions of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023. A significant concern among these petitions is the Act's amendment to the Right to Information (RTI) Act. Petitioners argue that this amendment substantially weakens citizens' right to access information by creating an expansive exemption for 'personal information,' thereby potentially undermining transparency and accountability.

In August, a bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice V. Mohana had already begun examining submissions regarding the amendment to Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. This amendment is alleged to disrupt the constitutional balance between the right to information, guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a), and the right to privacy. Justice Joymalya Bagchi had previously noted that while the RTI Act and the DPDP Act operate in distinct spheres, their areas of overlap necessitate judicial scrutiny to determine if they can coexist harmoniously.

Justice Bagchi further remarked that the court would investigate whether there is an intelligible differentia justifying the differential treatment of digital personal data and if the Digital Personal Data Protection Act 2023 indirectly overrides the RTI Act by imposing a broader restriction on disclosure. The court also intends to assess whether the State's more cautious approach to disclosure meets the constitutional test of reasonable classification and if a blanket restriction on the disclosure of digital personal information can be justified. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Union of India, requested two weeks to file the Centre's response, assuring the bench that the government would provide justification for the legislative amendments. The court accepted this request, directing the Union to file its reply and scheduling the matter for further hearing before an appropriate non-miscellaneous bench. The case is titled DIGITAL NEWS PUBLISHERS ASSOCIATION Vs UNION OF INDIA, with the hearing date set for October 27, 2026.

Lawyers advising media organizations or entities handling personal data must ensure continued compliance with the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, as the Supreme Court has refused to grant an interim stay on its provisions. While the legal challenge regarding press freedom and RTI implications is ongoing, the Act remains in effect, necessitating adherence to its requirements.

Source: Original reporting via Live Law