anonymity vs privacy

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10044 OF 2010

CENTRAL PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER,

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ….. APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS

SUBHASH CHANDRA AGARWAL ….. RESPONDENT(S)

W I T H

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10045 OF 2010

A N D

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2683 OF 2010

J U D G M E N T

SANJIV KHANNA, J.

45. Referring to an article titled ‘Reasonable Expectations of 

Anonymity’

30 authored by Jeffrey M. Skopek, it is observed that 

distinction has been drawn between anonymity on one hand and 

privacy on the other as privacy involves hiding information 

whereas anonymity involves hiding what makes it personal by 

giving an example that furnishing of medical records of a patient 

would amount to an invasion of privacy, whereas a State may 

29 Richard A. Posner, “Privacy, Surveillance, and Law”, The University of Chicago Law Review 

(2008), Vol. 75, 251. 

30 Virginia Law Review (2015), Vol. 101, at pp. 691-762. 

Civil Appeal No. 10044 of 2010 & Ors. Page 59 of 108

have legitimate interest in analysing data borne from hospital 

records to understand and deal with a public health epidemic and 

to obviate serious impact on the population. If the anonymity of the 

individual/patient is preserved, it would legitimately assert a valid 

State interest in the preservation of public health. 

46. For the purpose of the present case, we are not concerned with

the specific connotations of the right to anonymity and the 

restrictions/limitations appended to it. In the context of the RTI Act, 

suffice would be to say that the right to protect identity and 

anonymity would be identically subjected to the public interest 

test.