Industry Odisha Bureau, Oct 28: The Supreme Court has sought the Centre’s response to a challenge to India’s data law. The petition, filed by the Digital News Publishers Association (DNPA), targets key DPDP Act provisions. It also questions parts of the DPDP Rules, 2025. The court issued notice on October 27 but declined an immediate stay.
Chief Justice Surya Kant led the bench, with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana. It sought replies from the Ministry of Law and Justice and MeitY. Notice was also issued on the stay plea, returnable on November 17. Issuing notice is a routine procedural step, not a verdict on merits. The court has not ruled on the validity of any provision. According to the report, the bench stressed balancing privacy with journalistic freedom.
The DNPA represents the digital arms of 21 news organisations. Members include The Indian Express, The Hindu, India Today and the Times Group. Zee, NDTV and Network18 are also part of the association. Its 698-page petition was filed on October 6. It seeks to quash most contested provisions, reportedly effective from May 2027. A joint challenge by major publishers gives the case wide industry significance.
The core argument is that the law lacks a specific exemption for journalism. Publishers say newsrooms could face notice, consent and erasure duties meant for commercial data handlers. This is the petitioners’ reading of the law, not settled legal interpretation. How the obligations would actually apply to reporting remains for the court to decide.
Senior Advocate Madhavi Divan argued for the petitioners. She said seeking permission from people being covered would defeat the purpose of reporting. Newsrooms, she warned, could struggle to function under such a requirement. She argued that earlier versions of the law had excluded journalism. Divan also contended that media is already regulated and accountable after publication. These remain counsel’s submissions, not findings of the bench.
The petition also raises concerns over records and sources. It says the obligations could force deletion of evidence and expose confidential sources. It further challenges the Centre’s powers to seek information from data processors. These concerns relate to potential use, as argued in the petition.
The law itself serves an important public purpose. It aims to protect citizens’ personal data from misuse and unauthorised processing. The Supreme Court recognised privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21 in 2017. Press freedom flows from Article 19(1)(a), which protects free speech and expression. The challenge now asks how these two rights can coexist.
The DIGIPUB News India Foundation and the Editors Guild of India raised similar concerns earlier. Divan called the DNPA petition the first comprehensive challenge by legacy media. The government’s response is still awaited. The eventual ruling could shape newsroom compliance and investigative reporting for years.
