THE RIGHT TO LIFE IS ONE OF THE BASIC HUMAN RIGHT AND NOT EVEN THE STATE HAS THE AUTHORITY TO VIOLATE THAT RIGHT, AND THE WORD LIFE IN ARTICLE 21 MEANS A LIFE OF DIGNITY AND NOT JUST AN ANIMAL LIFE.

As for protection of life and personal liberty is concerned no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law. COMMENTS:-- (1) Right to privacy:-- Right to life and personal liberty includes Right to privacy as an integral part guaranteed under part lll of the Constitution. (2) Timely delivery of justice is part of human rights. Denial of speedy justice is a threat to public confidence in the administration of justice. (3) When the undertrial prisoners are detained in jail custody to an indefinite period, article 21 of the Constitution is violated (4) Right to privacy is integral part of life. This is a cherished constitutional value and it is important that human beings be allowed domains of freedom that are free of public scrutiny unless they act as an unlawful manner. (5) Right to life is one of the basic human right and not even the State has the authority to violate that right. (6) The woman's right to make reproductive choices is also a dimension of "personal liberty" as understood under article 21.It is important to recognise that reproductive choices can be exercised to procreate as well as abstain from procreating. The crucial consideration is that a woman's right to privacy, dignity and bodily integrity should be respected. This means that there should be no restriction what so ever on the exercise of reproduction choices such as woman's right to refuse participation in sexual activity or alternatively the insistence on use of contraceptive methods. Further more Women are also free to choose birth control methods such as underground sterilisation procedures. Taken to their logical conclusion, reproductive rights includes a woman entitlement to carry a pregnancy to its full term, to give birth and to subsequently raise children. However, in the case of pregnant women there is also a compelling State interest in protecting the life of the prospective child. (7) Assurance of a fair trial is the first imperative of the dispensation of justice. (8) Right to livelihood is an integral facet of the right to life. The word life in article 21 means a life of dignity and not just an animal life.

NOTHING COULD BE CONSIDERED SECRET UNDER THE AMBIT OF PRIVACY AND NATIONAL SECURITY IF DISCUSSION HELD IN THE PARLIAMENT MORE OVER TECHNOLOGIES HAVE THEIR ILL - EFFECTS AS USED AND ABUSED BY COUNTER TECHNOLOGY

Right to privacy and national security services have a marginal line of distinction as protecting the privacy of the citizens and entering in to the review of zone consideration compromising the national security and on the other hand discussion the questions in the parliament of India .It is also a matter of fact and concern that the technology related to the software and services under the provision made and created for the welfare of society and circle and available in the public domain may have their merits and demerits for which they may be used and abused by the study of impact assessment realised by the key members demanding the transpancy and accountability in the administration . Ultimately every technology related to the privacy and national security is existing with in the zone of consideration as the expert committee too demanded for the verification of record and trial by the law code manual prefixed by the honourable Supreme court of India ,as arguments disclosure under law code manual is open before the office and authority more over every technology has its counter technology required to protect the safety measures and accuracy as examined by the security services and the agencies working on the captioned subject matter deliberation noticed by the government and the other related services .As such the Public service and the privacy as well as the national security if examined by the experts Committee and placed before the court of law will come in the public domain whether the report should be put in Public domain or not and on the other hand if any subject matter deliberation noticed and brought to the dialogues of the held parliamentary observation that could not be stated as a secret under right to the privacy or the national security .

NO INFORMATION COULD BE CONSIDERED PERSONAL IF SUBJECT MATTER ACCOUNTABLE

No information could be treated and considered as a personal information in case it is related to the public accountability and transparency as well as responsibility of the public authorities to analyse the data demanded by the study of impact assessment realised by the RTI act adjudication in this behalf for which the public authorities must do their duty and responsibility clear under law code manual of the description made instead of declaring the information personal.  Virtually every information if lying in the public domain must be supplied to the Applicants/ RTI activists/ volunteers .As such every information sought by the Applicant from the system of governance is related to the duty assigned to government infrastructure and liability for which the government servants are accountable to maintain the record up-to-date for which there is no logic to consider informations confidential in any way as the information is demanded when found necessary by the study of impact assessment realised by the agency / individual however the Empowerment delivered to the citizens of country must be furnished in the public domain under section 4 of the RTI act publications so that every one may look into the information related to work and conduct of his/her choice and vision for the welfare of society and circle as well as the individual concerned for which every citizen of country has been empowered to initiate issues and matter under the RTI act publications .The record pertinent to the life and liberty could not be considered under the observation of privacy as every activity is related to the public domain for which public authorities are responsible to issue necessary informations to the common man demanding free and fair justice from the system of governance and for which the public authorities are responsible to protect the fundamental rights of the Citizens of this country as paid for the work done more over democracy crops up from the power of vote cast by the individual so every information could be released to the individual one who is demanding the information under law code manual prefixed by the RTI act adjudication to take benefit of the empowerment delivered in favor of the individual concerned.

BENEFITS TAKEN BY THE INDIVIDUAL RELATED TO THE PUBLIC FUNDING COULD NOT BE CONSIDERED UNDER THE PRIVACY BY RTI ADJUDICATION

WHAT IS THE PRIVACY:-- In the real sense of consideration the privacy of human service and concern means a duty of the objective which is related and concerned to his own reflection and management for servival,however if the said service and work and conduct of the manpower has been processed and protected by the study of impact assessment realised by the public services as well as funding and other benefits in the service rendered by the individual concerned there remains no such privacy in that case of the eligibility criteria and the work done by the public authorities in this behalf of the welfare of individual concerned .In such cases the privacy could not be held obstructed as highlighted by the public authorities and brought to the notice of the all concerned responsible to challenge the status and benefits of the person who have taken benefits from the system of public funding and definitely required to be maintained in the transpancy in the administration and removal of any corruption in the such case of the privacy claimed by an individual concerned.In other means if the benefits of any person are related to the public funding those could not be denied to report under the provision of RTI act publications and should not be considered as a privacy of the person who has taken some help from the government money

SCORE BOARD OF A PERSON IS PERTINENT TO HIS PERSONALITY AND EVALUATION AND COULD NOT DENIED TO REPORT THE.

PRIVACY RELATES TO THE PERSON HOW EVER NOT TO THE PERSONALITY:-- The cases under RTI act publications are many times denied by the study of protocol mentioned in the history sheet of the realisation conferred by the public authorities and Applicants are compelled to follow further course of action in the matter processed by the law code manual prefixed in this behalf by the RTI act publications.The right of privacy is a natural one however it is cherished, inseparable and inalienable right as born with a human,name and history sheet extinguished with the name and score and circle of the person by way and virtue of which law and jurisprudence judiciary as related to the legal terms as well as the performance made under law code manual of the personality being public issue of the said position and situation could not denied to report the compliance made by that person during the course of service for the society and circle.As such any information which is in reason existing in the public domain of the public authorities could not be denied to made public by the public authorities as per decision and conclusion under RTI act publications particularly issued for the transpancy in administration so how it could be denied to report the compliance being extinguished with the personality highlighted in this behalf of the explanation made for clarification by the Applicant

ANY SERVICE RENDERED BY THE PUBLIC FUNDING COULD NOT BE CONSIDERED PRIVACY

WHAT IS THE PRIVACY:-- In the real sense of consideration the privacy of human service and concern means a duty of the objective which is related and concerned to his own reflection and management for servival,however if the said service and work and conduct of the manpower has been processed and protected by the study of impact assessment realised by the public services as well as funding and other benefits in the service rendered by the individual concerned there remains no such privacy in that case of the eligibility criteria and the work done by the public authorities in this behalf of the welfare of individual concerned .In such cases the privacy could not be held obstructed as highlighted by the public authorities and brought to the notice of the all concerned responsible to challenge the status and benefits of the person who have taken benefits from the system of public funding and definitely required to be maintained in the transpancy in the administration and removal of any corruption in the such case of the privacy claimed by an individual concerned.In other means if the benefits of any person are related to the public funding those could not be denied to report under the provision of RTI act publications and should not be considered as a privacy of the person who has taken some help from the government money

EVERY RTI INFORMATION HAS IT'S OWN INTEREST AND PURPOSE FOR DEMAND UNDER PUBLIC UTILITIES

PRIVACY COULD BE RELATED TO THE SECRECY BUT IT COULD NOT BE ISOLATED FROM THE PUBLIC FUNDING FOR USE AND EXERCISE OF THE SYSTEM OF GOVERNANCE AND THE ENQUIRIES UNDER RTI:- The RTI act publications have been empowered by the government to enquire about the information contained in this behalf of the transparency in administration and removal of corruption from the society and circle.The number of cases has been decided on the pattern standard of SC decision so issued in the case of Deshpande which is not correct and justified under the provision made by RTI act publications . The merits and demerits of each case are never similar inthe eye que of demands under RTI act 2005  hence there is no logic and reason to decide cases on the way as case file of Desh Pandey has been considered by the judiciary.Section 8(1)(j) in the case of privacy and secrecy would be identical in every case file of the RTI act 2005 and there is no reason to follow old decision of the SIC or CIC or the HC and SC for denying informations to the applicants as such every case has separate identity and situation for larger public utilities and the interests more over there is no logic to follow restrictions in the cases of Public funding utilities and consider it a privacy of the citizens The application of section 8 (1) (j) could be restricted on the basis of following conditions and the disclosure of which would prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of the country,relation with the foreign state or lead to incitement of an offence.And the disclosure of which would cause a breach of privilege of Parliament or the state legislature.The informations which could be brought to the notice of Parliament and the state legislature could not be denied to the citizens of this country