Delhi High Court Blocks Disclosure of PM Modi's and Smriti Irani's Academic Records

26 August, 2025

The Delhi High Court has set aside orders from the Central Information Commission (CIC) that had directed the disclosure of academic records for Prime Minister Narendra Modi and former Union Minister Smriti Irani. In separate judgments, the court ruled that educational qualifications are personal information and their disclosure, without an overriding public interest, would be an intrusion of privacy. The verdict establishes a significant precedent regarding the scope of the Right to Information (RTI) Act concerning the personal data of public figures.

Unpacked:

What specific legal reasoning did the Delhi High Court use to justify protecting academic records as personal information?

The Delhi High Court relied on Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, which exempts personal information from disclosure unless there is an overriding public interest. It cited the Supreme Court’s affirmation of privacy as a fundamental right, stating educational credentials fall under this protection and disclosure requires strict scrutiny unless compelling public interest is demonstrated.

Has the law regarding disclosure of personal data under the RTI Act changed recently?

Yes, amendments to the RTI Act have made the exemption for personal information more restrictive. The updated Section 8(1)(j) now provides a blanket ban on disclosing personal information, removing the previous public interest override and raising concerns among transparency advocates about reduced accountability.

Are academic qualifications required for holding public office in India?

No, academic qualifications are not a constitutional or statutory requirement for holding public office in India. The Delhi High Court explicitly noted this in its ruling, emphasizing that such information is not necessary for public accountability in the context of office eligibility.

What are the main arguments for and against restricting access to public figures' personal information under the RTI Act?

Supporters argue privacy is a fundamental right and protecting personal information prevents misuse of the RTI Act. Critics say the restrictions hinder transparency and accountability, making it harder to monitor corruption and ensure public officials’ honesty. The debate centers on finding a balance between privacy and the public’s right to know.