The Delhi High Court heard arguments on police videography of NEET protesters and will continue hearing the privacy challenge on July 27.
PIL Challenges Surveillance of Student Protesters
The Delhi High Court on Friday heard a public interest litigation questioning the alleged surveillance of students participating in NEET-related protests at Jantar Mantar. The petition contends that continuous videography and the reported use of facial recognition technology by the Delhi Police violate the fundamental right to privacy guaranteed under the Constitution.
The matter was heard by a Bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia.
Court Notes Similar Petitions Already Pending
At the outset, the Bench observed that two petitions raising similar issues were already pending before the Court and questioned the need for multiple proceedings on the same subject.
The Court suggested that the petitioner could either seek to be impleaded in the pending matters or have the present petition heard alongside them. However, the petitioner maintained that the present case raises distinct constitutional issues concerning surveillance of young student protesters.
After hearing the parties, the Court deferred the matter for further consideration on July 27.
Petition Raises Privacy and Facial Recognition Concerns
Appearing for the petitioner, Senior Advocate Nandita Rao relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India to argue that the right to privacy extends to individuals participating in peaceful public demonstrations.
She submitted that any surveillance measure affecting fundamental rights must satisfy the constitutional requirements of legality, legitimate State purpose and proportionality.
The petitioner also expressed concern over media reports suggesting the deployment of live facial recognition technology at protest sites, arguing that inaccuracies in such systems could wrongly implicate innocent individuals.
Solicitor General Defends Police Videography
Opposing the petition, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued that videography of public protests is an established law enforcement practice carried out in accordance with Supreme Court directions and existing police protocols.
He submitted that such recording serves the legitimate purpose of maintaining public order and identifying offenders if any unlawful incidents occur during demonstrations.
The Solicitor General further contended that individuals participating in public protests cannot claim an absolute expectation of privacy when the events are held in open public spaces.
Debate Over Safeguards for Collected Data
Responding to the State’s submissions, the petitioner clarified that the challenge was not directed against videography itself but against the absence of statutory safeguards governing the collection, storage and use of surveillance data.
It was argued that unlike private individuals or journalists, the State possesses coercive powers and therefore must be subject to stricter legal standards while collecting personal information.
Questions were also raised regarding how the recorded footage is preserved, who has access to it and what protections exist against misuse.
Matter to Be Heard Again on July 27
After hearing extensive submissions from both sides, the Bench observed that it would first examine the issues in detail before taking any view on the constitutional questions involved.
As the arguments remained incomplete, the High Court directed that the matter be listed for further hearing on July 27.
The proceedings are expected to address the balance between an individual’s right to privacy and the State’s obligation to maintain public order during public demonstrations.
Key Takeaways
- Delhi High Court heard a PIL challenging police surveillance during NEET protests.
- The petition questions continuous videography and alleged facial recognition technology.
- Solicitor General Tushar Mehta defended videography as necessary for maintaining law and order.
- The petitioner argued that surveillance must satisfy constitutional privacy safeguards.
- The Court noted similar petitions are already pending before it.
- The matter has been listed for further hearing on July 27.
Also Read: Paid Legal Internship at Law Chambers of Arjun Raghavendra M
Case Details
Case Title: Ms. Aishe Ghosh v. Union of India & Another
Court: Delhi High Court
Bench: Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia
Hearing Date: July 24, 2026
Delhi High Court, NEET Protest, Right to Privacy, Facial Recognition
