CHENNAI DR.

AMBEDKAR GOVERNMENT LAW COLLEGE, PUDUDPAKKAM

REGISTER NO.516A0130

IN THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF SINDHIANA

ORIGINAL WRIT JURISDICTION

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION

(Under Art. 32 of the Constitution)

W.P. No. ……………………of 2021

The People Foundation Of Internet Privacy NGO PETITIONER

V.
.

Republic Of Sidhiana RESPONDENT

_____________________________________________________________________________

On submission to the Supreme Court of Sindhiana

Memorial on behalf of the RESPONDENT

ARULMOZHIVARMAN T

5160130

Vth Year B section COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT Page 1

CHENNAI DR.AMBEDKAR GOVERNMENT LAW COLLEGE, PUDUDPAKKAM

REGISTER NO.516A0130

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................. 3

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES .................................................................... 5

TABLE OF CASES ................................................................................. 6

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION ...................................................... 7

STATEMENT OF FACTS ..................................................................... 8

STATEMENT OF ISSUES ......................................................................10

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS……………………………………………9

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED……………………………………………..12

PRAYER……………………………………………………………………17

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT Page 2

CHENNAI DR.AMBEDKAR GOVERNMENT LAW COLLEGE, PUDUDPAKKAM

REGISTER NO.516A0130

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

& And

AIR All India Reporter

Art. Article

DLT Delhi Law Times

Ed. Edition

et al et alia

etc. et cetera

i.e. id est

Ors. Others

p. Page

pp. Pages

para Paragraph

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT Page 3

CHENNAI DR.AMBEDKAR GOVERNMENT LAW COLLEGE, PUDUDPAKKAM

REGISTER NO.516A0130

RPC Reports of Patent, Design and Trademarks

Cases
Sec. Section

SC Supreme Court

SCC Supreme Court Cases

SCR Supreme Court Reporter

Supp. Supplement

v. Versus

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT Page 4

CHENNAI DR.AMBEDKAR GOVERNMENT LAW COLLEGE, PUDUDPAKKAM

REGISTER NO.516A0130

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

CASES REFERED:

 Confederation of Ex. Servicemen v. Union of India. AIR 2006 SC 2945

 Paschim Banga Khet Mazdoor Samity

 Consumer Education and Research Center v. Association of India

 Vincent v. Union of India

LIST OF BOOKS REFERRED:

 Pandey, Dr. J. N., The Constitutional Law of India, 45th Ed., Central Law Agency, 2008

 Shukla, V. N., Constitution of India, 11th Ed., Eastern Book Company, Lucknow

 Rajgopal Saikumar, The constitutional politics of judicial review and the Supreme
Court’s human rights discourse

 Surabhi Chopra - Securing rights, protecting the nation?: national security and
the Indian Supreme Cour

LIST OF LEXICONS REFERRED:

 Wex legal dictionary, www.law.cornell.edu

 Black Law Dictionary

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT Page 5

CHENNAI DR.AMBEDKAR GOVERNMENT LAW COLLEGE, PUDUDPAKKAM

REGISTER NO.516A0130

➢ LEGAL DATABASES:

➢ Case mine.

➢ Indian kanoon

➢ Manupatra

➢ SCC Online

➢ West Law

➢ Hein Online

LIST OF STATUTES REFERRED:

1. Constitution of India, 1950

2. Indian Contract Act, 1872
3. Consumer Protection Act, 1986
4. The Protection Of Human Rights, 1993

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT Page 6

CHENNAI DR.AMBEDKAR GOVERNMENT LAW COLLEGE, PUDUDPAKKAM

REGISTER NO.516A0130

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The Petitioner approach this Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has the
jurisdiction in this matter under; Article 32 of the Constitution of India
which reads as follows:
Article 32 in The Constitution Of India 1949
32. Remedies for enforcement of rights conferred by this Part
(1) The right to move the Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of the
rights conferred by this Part is guaranteed
(2) The Supreme Court shall have power to issue directions or orders or writs, including writs in
the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari, whichever
may be appropriate, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by this Part
(3) Without prejudice to the powers conferred on the Supreme Court by clause ( 1 ) and ( 2 ),
Parliament may by law empower any other court to exercise within the local limits of its
jurisdiction all or any of the powers exercisable by the Supreme Court under clause ( 2 )
(4) The right guaranteed by this article shall not be suspended except as otherwise provided for
by this Constitution

HOWEVER, THE RESPONDENT MAINTAINS THAT NO VIOLATION OF RIGHTS HAS

TAKEN PLACE. THEREFORE, THIS HON’BLE COURT NEED NOT ENTRATAIN ITS
JURISDICTION IN THIS WRIT PETITION.

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT Page 7

CHENNAI DR.AMBEDKAR GOVERNMENT LAW COLLEGE, PUDUDPAKKAM

REGISTER NO.516A0130

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

1. The Republic of Sindhiana, being the second most populous country in the world, leads the
developing nations in terms of technological advancement. The citizens of Sindhiana are well
versed with the technology and different applications available in the tech-market. The
Government and the judiciary of the democratic country has been curtailing certain rights on
the usage of the internet and at times the freedom of speech and expression were upheld.
2. In the month of December 2019, there was a sudden outbreak of a novel coronavirus in
the province of Chuhan in the neighbouring state. The virus had spread across the nations
within a span of two to three months. The Central Government of Sindhiana declared a
complete lockdown from the month of March, 2020. Strict measures were taken by the
government to contain the spread of the virus.
3. Nonetheless, the characteristics of the virus differed from the normal virus and therefore
it had the tendency of spreading to people through touch or close proximity to the infected
persons. To trace the spread of the virus and to isolate the people who were in personal
contact with the infected, the Central Government set up an application known as the
“Sowkiya App” available in android and other online platforms.
4. The Sowkiya App works in such a way that the application has to be downloaded by
every mobile user. The details of the users are collected by the application. This is primarily
used for contact tracing, a method to control further spread of the virus.
5. Even after the complete lockdown was lifted, the Central Government directed all
the State Government authorities to make it mandatory for the people of Sindhiana to
download the application. The entry to government organisations, public transport,
private corporate establishments, shopping malls, cinema halls etc., required the citizens
to show the installed “Sowkiya App” to the security at the entrance.
6. Though these are desperate times, there were privacy concerns raised by privacy rights
organisations. The reason for the fear being that such apps could later be used for mass
surveillance. The Sowkiya app requires the user to enable GPS (location) and Bluetooth
always. Again, a person’s location and movement, user privacy gets compromised by
keeping the GPS and Bluetooth switched on. Other than the two major challenges, there were
doubts raised by information security experts on the lifespan of the app, its data management
protocols, user confidentiality, the absence of a viable mechanism to address data breach

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT Page 8

CHENNAI DR.AMBEDKAR GOVERNMENT LAW COLLEGE, PUDUDPAKKAM

REGISTER NO.516A0130
violations and an in-built “No liability” clause protecting the app developers.
7. The app collects a significant amount of personal data such as: name, phone number, age,
sex, profession, countries visited in the last 30 days, user’s lifestyle and habits. Around 9
NGO’s and 150 individuals raised the issue along with the infringement of “right to
privacy” to the Central Government of Sindhiana.
8. The statement also asks for accountability in case of breach. In response to the concerns
raised, the Government declared the application as open source and stated that Right to
health is paramount compared to the Right to privacy in these unprecedented times.
9. One of the NGO’s, “The People Foundation on Internet Privacy” filed a PIL before the
Hon’ble Supreme Court of Sindhiana. The laws of the Republic of Sindhiana are in pari
materia with that of the Republic of India.

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT Page 9

CHENNAI DR.AMBEDKAR GOVERNMENT LAW COLLEGE, PUDUDPAKKAM

REGISTER NO.516A0130
ISSUES

ISSUE 1:

WHETHER THE PIL FILED BY THE PEOPLE FOUNDATION OF INTERNET PRIVACY

NGO ARE MAINTAINABLE OR NOT

ISSUE 2:

WHETHER IT IS NECESSARY FOR THE PUBLIC TO INSTALL THE APP EVEN AFTER
A LOCKDOWN IS LIFTED

ISSUE 3

WHETHER RIGHT TO HEALTH IS PARAMOUNT IN COMPARED TO RIGHT TO

PRIVACY.

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT Page 10

CHENNAI DR.AMBEDKAR GOVERNMENT LAW COLLEGE, PUDUDPAKKAM

REGISTER NO.516A0130

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

1. Whether the PIL filed by The People Foundation Of Internet Privacy

(NGO) are maintainable or not?

The PIL filed by the petitioner is not maintainable as from the statement of fact
that the petitioner approach the hon’ble supreme court that the sowkiya app
violate the right to privacy of the individual but the sowkiya app was set up to
trace the spread of the virus and to isolate the people who were in personal contact
with the infected. Hence it is humbly submitted that the PIL was not maintainable

2. Whether it is necessary for the public to install the app even after the
lockdown is lifted?
It is humbly submitted before this hon’ble supreme court as being the second
most populous country in the world it is necessary for the public to install the
app even after the lockdown is lifted, because the government has only lifted
the lockdown in order to bring back the dying economy of the country, it is
necessary for the public to install the app even after the lockdown is lifted.

3. Whether right to health is paramount in compared to right to privacy?

It is humbly submitted before this Hon’ble though both the right to health and right to
privacy are important to the people,but now on considering the situation of novel
coronavirus ,on the welfare of the citizens It is submitted that the right to health is
paramount to the right to privacy.

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT Page 11

 CHENNAI DR.AMBEDKAR GOVERNMENT LAW COLLEGE, PUDUDPAKKAM

REGISTER NO.516A0130

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

1. Whether the PIL filed by The People Foundation Of Internet Privacy (NGO)
are maintainable or not?

The PIL filed by the petitioner is not maintainable as from the statement of fact that the
petitioner approach the hon’ble supreme court that the sowkiya app violate the right to privacy
of the individual but the sowkiya app was set up to trace the spread of the virus and to isolate
the people who were in personal contact with the infected.

The Sowkiya App was not launched to steal people’s data and labelling such allegations during
a pandemic is extremely pointless. It is an online platform that aims to connect citizens to the
government. The Sowkiya app was designed by the effective authorities of the Sindhiana
Government with an objective to collect data on people’s location and cross refer it with the
Medical Research Council’s database of COVID-19 tests to warn a user if an infected person is
in the vicinity.

While the government has been pushing for aggressive adoption of the app, the app has also
invited criticism over privacy standards as it takes user to provide location data at all times and
also asks for the user’s name, gender, profession and countries visited. The claim of the petitioner
that all personal data of the users of sowkiya app is shared has no foundation at all, inasmuch as, all the
safeguards have been provided. It is submitted that sowkiya app is one of the important tools for locating
those who are infected with COVID-19.”

The benefits of downloading the App are that, those who get symptoms similar to coronavirus
will get a phone call. They are also connected to the doctors. Suggestions are given to the
people like what is better for their health and what steps they should take.

Individual rights cannot be absolute in a welfare state. It has to be subservient to the rights of
the public at large. Therefore, the right to life of public at large 1is protected through Sowkiya
app usage and also no data breach or privacy invasion was proved. Furthermore, the app was
declared open source to make it more reliable, convenient to use and to rectify any possible

1
Confederation of Ex. Servicemen v. Union of India. AIR 2006 SC 2945
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT Page 12
 CHENNAI DR.AMBEDKAR GOVERNMENT LAW COLLEGE, PUDUDPAKKAM

REGISTER NO.516A0130
errors by any technologically aware citizen.

Therefore, as there is no constitutional right being violated and the direction being given under
reasonable procedure established by law this PIL has no ground to challenge the centre’s
directive as contended by the respondents and is deemed to be dismissed in limine. Hence the
PIL filed by The People Foundation Of Internet Privacy (NGO) are not maintainable.

2. Whether it is necessary for the public to install the app even after the lockdown is lifted?

It is humbly submitted before this hon’ble supreme court as being the second most populous
country in the world it is necessary for the public to install the app even after the lockdown is
lifted, because the government has only lifted the lockdown in order to bring back the dying
economy of the country, but has never mentioned that the deadly COVID – 19 virus or the
pandemic has been eradicated from the country. The app still lets the people to know the
quarantined areas and provides its everything to keep the people aware of all current situations
about the pandemic.

The Government of Sindhiana will use the user’s data only for certain purposes such as medical
emergencies. This apart, the data will not be used for any other work. The app will not reveal
anyone’s name or any other personal details, information of any COVID – 19 patients will not
be shared with anyone. User’s data in the app is completely secure. In case of normal people,
the information will be deleted from the data server after 30 days. In case of corona-infected
patient, the limit to remove the data is 60 days.

As soon as a user enters into any of the coronavirus affected zones or comes in contact with a
coronavirus infected person, he will receive a notification. The location data of a user is only
used to track the person’s movement so that he/she can be alerted. Apart from this, the location
data would not be used anywhere else. The app would work efficiently only if the users submit
all the right information Hence it is necessary for the public to install the app even after the
lockdown is lifted to protect their lives.

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT Page 13

CHENNAI DR.AMBEDKAR GOVERNMENT LAW COLLEGE, PUDUDPAKKAM

REGISTER NO.516A0130

3. WHETHER RIGHT TO HEALTH IS PARAMOUNT IN COMPARED TO RIGHT

TO PRIVACY.

It is humbly submitted that stated that Right to health is paramount compared to the Right to
privacy in these unprecedented times,

3.1 WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION ON RIGHT TO HEALTH

The term Right to Health was first articulated in the WHO Constitution (1946) which states
that “the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health is one of the fundamental rights
of every human being…”. In addition to the generally satisfactory meaning of health is that in
the introduction of World Health Organisation’s constitution, is “Health is a condition of
complete physical, mental and social prosperity and not only the nonappearance of disease”. As
of late, this announcement has been intensified to incorporate the capacity to lead a ‘socially
and economically productive life’.

3.2 SINDHIANA CONSTITUTION ON RIGHT TO HEALTH

The preamble of the Constitution defines health as: “A state of complete physical, mental and
social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity”. Earlier the Right to
Health was a part of Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP). Article 38 of Indian
Constitution imposes an obligation on the State that states will make sure about a social request
for the advancement of government assistance of the individuals however without general
health we can’t accomplish it. It implies without general health government assistance of
individuals is unthinkable. In SINDHIANA, the Directive Principle of State Policy under
Article 47 thinks of it as the essential obligation of the state to improve general health, making
sure about equity, human state of works, expansion of disorder, mature age, disablement and
maternity benefits and furthermore thought about. However, the Supreme Court has carried the
right to health under Article 21. The extent of this arrangement is extremely wide. It endorses
the right of life and individual freedom. The idea of individual freedom fathomed numerous
rights, identified with by implication to life or freedom of an individual. Furthermore, presently
an individual can guarantee his right of health. Consequently, the right to health, alongside

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT Page 14

CHENNAI DR.AMBEDKAR GOVERNMENT LAW COLLEGE, PUDUDPAKKAM

REGISTER NO.516A0130
various other common, political and monetary rights, is managed insurance under the Indian
Constitution.

3.3 Consumer Education and Research Center v. Association of India,

The Supreme Court set out that: “Social equity which is a device to guarantee life to be
significant and decent with human nobility requires the State to give to laborers offices and
chances to reach at any rate least standard of health, monetary security and edified living. The
health and quality of laborers, the court stated, was a significant feature of right to life.
Disavowal thereof bares the laborers the better aspects of life damaging Art. 21.” The court had
explicitly opined that right to health was additionally a fundamental factor to have an important
existence and for the right to life under Part III.

The Supreme Court in Vincent v. Union of India, accentuated that a healthy body is the very
establishment of all human activities. Article 47, a Directive Principle of State Policy in such
manner lays pressure on the improvement of general health and denial of medicate/ons harmful
to health as one of the essential obligations of the state.

Right to health alludes to and means the most achievable degrees of health that each person is
qualified for. Health has been greatly viewed as the essential and major human right by the
global network under worldwide human rights law. with respect to the right to health; these
reach from satisfactory security by the state, giving equivalent health care offices to every
person and forcing the most significant commitment upon the state to make such ideal
conditions which render the satisfaction of the right to health.

Consequently, the Hon’ble Supreme acted as the hero and brought the right under the domain of
Article 21 of the Constitution of India.Article 21 guarantees the right of life and freedom to
every person, residents or non-residents. The idea of individual freedom is intended to
incorporate rights that might possibly be legitimately connected to the life and freedom of an
individual; which presently incorporates the right to health too,the acknowledgment of health
care as principal right.

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT Page 15

CHENNAI DR.AMBEDKAR GOVERNMENT LAW COLLEGE, PUDUDPAKKAM

REGISTER NO.516A0130
For another situation of Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Association of India, the court held that
despite the fact that the Directive Principles of State Policy hold influential worth, yet they
ought to be appropriately actualized by the state; and it was for this situation additionally that
the court had deciphered the poise and health inside the ambit of life and freedom under Article
21 of the Constitution of India.

In the Ram Lubhaya case, while looking at the spinning around the issue of right to health
under Article 21, 41 and 47 of the Constitution of India, the court saw that the right of one
associate with the obligation of another. Consequently, the right endowed under Article 21
forces an equal obligation on the state which is additionally strengthened as under Article 47.
Despite the fact that few schools and emergency clinics are set up by the administration
however, the obligation isn’t satisfied until they can be in reach of the overall population. It is
relevant to take note of that the Hon’ble Court for this situation respected health to be a
consecrated, holy and important right.

In Paschim Banga Khet Mazdoor Samity case, the extent of Article 21 was additionally
broadened; Thus, the court held that it is the duty of the legislature to give sufficient clinical
guidance to each individual and to work in the government assistance of the overall population.

From the view of WHO, OUR CONSTITUTION and some important LANDMARK
JUDGEMENTS it is clearly shows how much right to health is important to any other right
comes under right to life, Government across the board are likely to use technology for better
implementation of health and safety checks and balances. This will not only safeguard the well-
being of citizens, but also aid in commencing several businesses which are currently reeling
under tremendous pressure due to lockdown.

Hence it is humbly submitted before this Hon’ble though both the right to health and right to
privacy are important to the people,but now on considering the situation of novel coronavirus
,on the welfare of the citizens It is submitted that the right to health is paramount to the right to
privacy.

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT Page 16

CHENNAI DR.AMBEDKAR GOVERNMENT LAW COLLEGE, PUDUDPAKKAM

REGISTER NO.516A0130

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

Wherefore in the light of the issues raised, arguments advanced and authorities cited, it is
humbly prayed before this Hon’ble Court to adjudge and declare that this PIL is not
maintainable and must be rejected. The court may pass any other order or orders as this
Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and in the light of
justice, equity and good conscience and thus render Justice.

All of which is respectfully submitted

Counsel for the Respondent

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT Page 17