In a Landmark Ruling, the Kerala High Court Affirms the Right to Dignity and Privacy, Declaring That Late-Night Home Visits to History-Sheeters Violate Constitutional Rights. Quoting the age-old principle that “every man’s house is his castle or temple,” the court emphasised that law enforcement must balance crime control with constitutional rights, notably the right to privacy and dignity.
The Midnight Knock That Sparked a Legal Battle
The case before the Kerala High Court arose from a midnight encounter in Kochi’s Thopumpady area, where police officers visited the residence of a man labelled a “history-sheeter” for routine surveillance. The individual refused to open the door, allegedly abused the officers, and was subsequently booked under provisions of the Kerala Police Act for obstructing police duty.
The petitioner approached the High Court, asserting that he was harassed without cause and that the midnight knock amounted to an infringement of his fundamental rights. The incident prompted the judiciary to reflect on broader questions of due process, privacy, and the scope of state power.
FCRF x CERT-In Roll Out National Cyber Crisis Management Course to Prepare India’s Digital Defenders
Court Draws the Line: Rights vs. Routine
Delivering its verdict, the High Court did not merely decide in favour of the petitioner, it reinstated a significant legal precedent. The court observed:
“Every man’s house is his castle or temple, the sanctity of which cannot be vilified by knocking on the door at odd hours.”
Justice was not merely procedural but philosophical in tone. The court reaffirmed that Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, must include the right to live with dignity and privacy, even for individuals with a criminal past.
It declared that night-time intrusions into residences for mere surveillance, without an imminent threat or legal necessity, constituted a breach of fundamental rights. Legal experts believe this could alter how policing is conducted across India, particularly in cases involving habitual offenders who are often under constant watch.
Algoritha: The Most Trusted Name in BFSI Investigations and DFIR Services
Surveillance vs. Harassment: A Nationwide Police Dilemma
The verdict has brought to the fore a critical tension in Indian policing: the tightrope between preventive policing and civil rights violations. Police forces across India routinely maintain lists of history-sheeters and conduct surprise checks to deter criminal activity. Critics argue that such practices often turn into harassment, disproportionately affecting marginalized communities or individuals with past brushes with the law.
Civil rights activists hailed the Kerala High Court judgment as a long-awaited assertion of judicial oversight over intrusive surveillance. Former IPS officer and rights advocate Dr. Vikram Singh noted:
“Policing must evolve from colonial-era methods of intimidation to rights-based community policing. This ruling is a much-needed wake-up call.”
Meanwhile, state police officials are reviewing internal protocols in light of the judgment, though some express concern over operational challenges posed by limiting night checks.
About the author – Prakriti Jha is a student at National Forensic Sciences University, Gandhinagar, currently pursuing B.Sc. LL.B (Hons.) with a keen interest in the intersection of law and data science. She is passionate about exploring how legal frameworks adapt to the evolving challenges of technology and justice.