Question Description
The first thing to know when talking about privacy in India is that a majority of the population does not always understand what it means. It is at times confused with shame. Its also confused with the emotion we feel when we do something that does not meet our standards or our sense of what is right. Modern Indian languages do not seem to have an exact word which captures the meaning of privacy; theyre usually some variation of the words for isolation, intimacy or secrecy, once again hinting at a conceptual confusion.Privacy, however, is not only about hiding something or keeping it secret. It is, at its core, the right to be left alone. It doesnt mean that one is withdrawing from society. It is an expectation that society will not interfere in the choices made by the person so long as they do not cause harm to others. It means that ones right to eat whatever one chooses, the right to drink what one chooses, the right to love and marry whom one chooses, to wear what one chooses, among others, are rights which the state cannot interfere with. It is natural that the very concept of privacy seems incomprehensible. If you have grown up in a society where everything you do is dictated by someone else, and the cost of disobedience is high, to have the freedom to choose what you will in such important matters sounds like fantasy. But it is also a common misconception that the non-well-off in India do not know or care about privacy.Millions of men and women push back daily against the oppressive hold of their families and communities, and fight for the freedom to make their own choices. They may not have the right word for it, but they are creating space for themselves to exercise the right to privacy.It is in this context that one must understand the hearings in the Supreme Court on the right to privacy. Although the nine-judge bench has decided there is a fundamental right to privacy protected under the Constitution in the specific context of the Aadhaar case, privacy has many more dimensions than just data protection or surveillance by the state. A fundamental right to privacy, enshrined and protected in the Constitution, would mean that all persons have the right to be left alone by the state unless such intrusion is necessitated by a just, reasonable, and fair law. The implications of the judgment will go far beyond just the Aadhaar scheme and law. The law laid down by the Supreme Court on privacy could affect the course of development of the law governing reproductive rights, gay rights, beef bans, prohibition, among a host of other issues that the Indian state and society are grappling with.Q. Auto Shanker was conv icted of six murders and sentenced to death. While in jail, Shanker wrote his auto-biography and expressed his wish that this be published in the Blitz magazine. Before publishing the autobiography, Blitz announced the publication.Prison officials then forced Shanker to write to the magazine requesting that the auto-biography not be published. Blitz then brought the action to prevent the Prison officials from violating the magazines and the prisoners Freedom of Expression. In such a case, based on the authors reasoning, which will be the best option to strike the balance between the freedom of press vis-A-vis the right to privacy of the citizens.a)Blitz has the absolute right to publish which is safeguarded by the right to freedom of press, speech and expression.b)Blitz should not have any concern about the privacy claims of Auto Shanker in the interest of the public knowing a prisoners life.c)Auto Shanker privacy is paramount trumping any obstacle posed by the freedom of press of Blitz.d)Blitz has the right to publish insofar as it appears from the public records but this right cannot intrude into personal life endangering his privacy.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? for Class 12 2024 is part of Class 12 preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the Class 12 exam syllabus. Information about The first thing to know when talking about privacy in India is that a majority of the population does not always understand what it means. It is at times confused with shame. Its also confused with the emotion we feel when we do something that does not meet our standards or our sense of what is right. Modern Indian languages do not seem to have an exact word which captures the meaning of privacy; theyre usually some variation of the words for isolation, intimacy or secrecy, once again hinting at a conceptual confusion.Privacy, however, is not only about hiding something or keeping it secret. It is, at its core, the right to be left alone. It doesnt mean that one is withdrawing from society. It is an expectation that society will not interfere in the choices made by the person so long as they do not cause harm to others. It means that ones right to eat whatever one chooses, the right to drink what one chooses, the right to love and marry whom one chooses, to wear what one chooses, among others, are rights which the state cannot interfere with. It is natural that the very concept of privacy seems incomprehensible. If you have grown up in a society where everything you do is dictated by someone else, and the cost of disobedience is high, to have the freedom to choose what you will in such important matters sounds like fantasy. But it is also a common misconception that the non-well-off in India do not know or care about privacy.Millions of men and women push back daily against the oppressive hold of their families and communities, and fight for the freedom to make their own choices. They may not have the right word for it, but they are creating space for themselves to exercise the right to privacy.It is in this context that one must understand the hearings in the Supreme Court on the right to privacy. Although the nine-judge bench has decided there is a fundamental right to privacy protected under the Constitution in the specific context of the Aadhaar case, privacy has many more dimensions than just data protection or surveillance by the state. A fundamental right to privacy, enshrined and protected in the Constitution, would mean that all persons have the right to be left alone by the state unless such intrusion is necessitated by a just, reasonable, and fair law. The implications of the judgment will go far beyond just the Aadhaar scheme and law. The law laid down by the Supreme Court on privacy could affect the course of development of the law governing reproductive rights, gay rights, beef bans, prohibition, among a host of other issues that the Indian state and society are grappling with.Q. Auto Shanker was conv icted of six murders and sentenced to death. While in jail, Shanker wrote his auto-biography and expressed his wish that this be published in the Blitz magazine. Before publishing the autobiography, Blitz announced the publication.Prison officials then forced Shanker to write to the magazine requesting that the auto-biography not be published. Blitz then brought the action to prevent the Prison officials from violating the magazines and the prisoners Freedom of Expression. In such a case, based on the authors reasoning, which will be the best option to strike the balance between the freedom of press vis-A-vis the right to privacy of the citizens.a)Blitz has the absolute right to publish which is safeguarded by the right to freedom of press, speech and expression.b)Blitz should not have any concern about the privacy claims of Auto Shanker in the interest of the public knowing a prisoners life.c)Auto Shanker privacy is paramount trumping any obstacle posed by the freedom of press of Blitz.d)Blitz has the right to publish insofar as it appears from the public records but this right cannot intrude into personal life endangering his privacy.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for Class 12 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for The first thing to know when talking about privacy in India is that a majority of the population does not always understand what it means. It is at times confused with shame. Its also confused with the emotion we feel when we do something that does not meet our standards or our sense of what is right. Modern Indian languages do not seem to have an exact word which captures the meaning of privacy; theyre usually some variation of the words for isolation, intimacy or secrecy, once again hinting at a conceptual confusion.Privacy, however, is not only about hiding something or keeping it secret. It is, at its core, the right to be left alone. It doesnt mean that one is withdrawing from society. It is an expectation that society will not interfere in the choices made by the person so long as they do not cause harm to others. It means that ones right to eat whatever one chooses, the right to drink what one chooses, the right to love and marry whom one chooses, to wear what one chooses, among others, are rights which the state cannot interfere with. It is natural that the very concept of privacy seems incomprehensible. If you have grown up in a society where everything you do is dictated by someone else, and the cost of disobedience is high, to have the freedom to choose what you will in such important matters sounds like fantasy. But it is also a common misconception that the non-well-off in India do not know or care about privacy.Millions of men and women push back daily against the oppressive hold of their families and communities, and fight for the freedom to make their own choices. They may not have the right word for it, but they are creating space for themselves to exercise the right to privacy.It is in this context that one must understand the hearings in the Supreme Court on the right to privacy. Although the nine-judge bench has decided there is a fundamental right to privacy protected under the Constitution in the specific context of the Aadhaar case, privacy has many more dimensions than just data protection or surveillance by the state. A fundamental right to privacy, enshrined and protected in the Constitution, would mean that all persons have the right to be left alone by the state unless such intrusion is necessitated by a just, reasonable, and fair law. The implications of the judgment will go far beyond just the Aadhaar scheme and law. The law laid down by the Supreme Court on privacy could affect the course of development of the law governing reproductive rights, gay rights, beef bans, prohibition, among a host of other issues that the Indian state and society are grappling with.Q. Auto Shanker was conv icted of six murders and sentenced to death. While in jail, Shanker wrote his auto-biography and expressed his wish that this be published in the Blitz magazine. Before publishing the autobiography, Blitz announced the publication.Prison officials then forced Shanker to write to the magazine requesting that the auto-biography not be published. Blitz then brought the action to prevent the Prison officials from violating the magazines and the prisoners Freedom of Expression. In such a case, based on the authors reasoning, which will be the best option to strike the balance between the freedom of press vis-A-vis the right to privacy of the citizens.a)Blitz has the absolute right to publish which is safeguarded by the right to freedom of press, speech and expression.b)Blitz should not have any concern about the privacy claims of Auto Shanker in the interest of the public knowing a prisoners life.c)Auto Shanker privacy is paramount trumping any obstacle posed by the freedom of press of Blitz.d)Blitz has the right to publish insofar as it appears from the public records but this right cannot intrude into personal life endangering his privacy.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for The first thing to know when talking about privacy in India is that a majority of the population does not always understand what it means. It is at times confused with shame. Its also confused with the emotion we feel when we do something that does not meet our standards or our sense of what is right. Modern Indian languages do not seem to have an exact word which captures the meaning of privacy; theyre usually some variation of the words for isolation, intimacy or secrecy, once again hinting at a conceptual confusion.Privacy, however, is not only about hiding something or keeping it secret. It is, at its core, the right to be left alone. It doesnt mean that one is withdrawing from society. It is an expectation that society will not interfere in the choices made by the person so long as they do not cause harm to others. It means that ones right to eat whatever one chooses, the right to drink what one chooses, the right to love and marry whom one chooses, to wear what one chooses, among others, are rights which the state cannot interfere with. It is natural that the very concept of privacy seems incomprehensible. If you have grown up in a society where everything you do is dictated by someone else, and the cost of disobedience is high, to have the freedom to choose what you will in such important matters sounds like fantasy. But it is also a common misconception that the non-well-off in India do not know or care about privacy.Millions of men and women push back daily against the oppressive hold of their families and communities, and fight for the freedom to make their own choices. They may not have the right word for it, but they are creating space for themselves to exercise the right to privacy.It is in this context that one must understand the hearings in the Supreme Court on the right to privacy. Although the nine-judge bench has decided there is a fundamental right to privacy protected under the Constitution in the specific context of the Aadhaar case, privacy has many more dimensions than just data protection or surveillance by the state. A fundamental right to privacy, enshrined and protected in the Constitution, would mean that all persons have the right to be left alone by the state unless such intrusion is necessitated by a just, reasonable, and fair law. The implications of the judgment will go far beyond just the Aadhaar scheme and law. The law laid down by the Supreme Court on privacy could affect the course of development of the law governing reproductive rights, gay rights, beef bans, prohibition, among a host of other issues that the Indian state and society are grappling with.Q. Auto Shanker was conv icted of six murders and sentenced to death. While in jail, Shanker wrote his auto-biography and expressed his wish that this be published in the Blitz magazine. Before publishing the autobiography, Blitz announced the publication.Prison officials then forced Shanker to write to the magazine requesting that the auto-biography not be published. Blitz then brought the action to prevent the Prison officials from violating the magazines and the prisoners Freedom of Expression. In such a case, based on the authors reasoning, which will be the best option to strike the balance between the freedom of press vis-A-vis the right to privacy of the citizens.a)Blitz has the absolute right to publish which is safeguarded by the right to freedom of press, speech and expression.b)Blitz should not have any concern about the privacy claims of Auto Shanker in the interest of the public knowing a prisoners life.c)Auto Shanker privacy is paramount trumping any obstacle posed by the freedom of press of Blitz.d)Blitz has the right to publish insofar as it appears from the public records but this right cannot intrude into personal life endangering his privacy.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for Class 12. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for Class 12 Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of The first thing to know when talking about privacy in India is that a majority of the population does not always understand what it means. It is at times confused with shame. Its also confused with the emotion we feel when we do something that does not meet our standards or our sense of what is right. Modern Indian languages do not seem to have an exact word which captures the meaning of privacy; theyre usually some variation of the words for isolation, intimacy or secrecy, once again hinting at a conceptual confusion.Privacy, however, is not only about hiding something or keeping it secret. It is, at its core, the right to be left alone. It doesnt mean that one is withdrawing from society. It is an expectation that society will not interfere in the choices made by the person so long as they do not cause harm to others. It means that ones right to eat whatever one chooses, the right to drink what one chooses, the right to love and marry whom one chooses, to wear what one chooses, among others, are rights which the state cannot interfere with. It is natural that the very concept of privacy seems incomprehensible. If you have grown up in a society where everything you do is dictated by someone else, and the cost of disobedience is high, to have the freedom to choose what you will in such important matters sounds like fantasy. But it is also a common misconception that the non-well-off in India do not know or care about privacy.Millions of men and women push back daily against the oppressive hold of their families and communities, and fight for the freedom to make their own choices. They may not have the right word for it, but they are creating space for themselves to exercise the right to privacy.It is in this context that one must understand the hearings in the Supreme Court on the right to privacy. Although the nine-judge bench has decided there is a fundamental right to privacy protected under the Constitution in the specific context of the Aadhaar case, privacy has many more dimensions than just data protection or surveillance by the state. A fundamental right to privacy, enshrined and protected in the Constitution, would mean that all persons have the right to be left alone by the state unless such intrusion is necessitated by a just, reasonable, and fair law. The implications of the judgment will go far beyond just the Aadhaar scheme and law. The law laid down by the Supreme Court on privacy could affect the course of development of the law governing reproductive rights, gay rights, beef bans, prohibition, among a host of other issues that the Indian state and society are grappling with.Q. Auto Shanker was conv icted of six murders and sentenced to death. While in jail, Shanker wrote his auto-biography and expressed his wish that this be published in the Blitz magazine. Before publishing the autobiography, Blitz announced the publication.Prison officials then forced Shanker to write to the magazine requesting that the auto-biography not be published. Blitz then brought the action to prevent the Prison officials from violating the magazines and the prisoners Freedom of Expression. In such a case, based on the authors reasoning, which will be the best option to strike the balance between the freedom of press vis-A-vis the right to privacy of the citizens.a)Blitz has the absolute right to publish which is safeguarded by the right to freedom of press, speech and expression.b)Blitz should not have any concern about the privacy claims of Auto Shanker in the interest of the public knowing a prisoners life.c)Auto Shanker privacy is paramount trumping any obstacle posed by the freedom of press of Blitz.d)Blitz has the right to publish insofar as it appears from the public records but this right cannot intrude into personal life endangering his privacy.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of The first thing to know when talking about privacy in India is that a majority of the population does not always understand what it means. It is at times confused with shame. Its also confused with the emotion we feel when we do something that does not meet our standards or our sense of what is right. Modern Indian languages do not seem to have an exact word which captures the meaning of privacy; theyre usually some variation of the words for isolation, intimacy or secrecy, once again hinting at a conceptual confusion.Privacy, however, is not only about hiding something or keeping it secret. It is, at its core, the right to be left alone. It doesnt mean that one is withdrawing from society. It is an expectation that society will not interfere in the choices made by the person so long as they do not cause harm to others. It means that ones right to eat whatever one chooses, the right to drink what one chooses, the right to love and marry whom one chooses, to wear what one chooses, among others, are rights which the state cannot interfere with. It is natural that the very concept of privacy seems incomprehensible. If you have grown up in a society where everything you do is dictated by someone else, and the cost of disobedience is high, to have the freedom to choose what you will in such important matters sounds like fantasy. But it is also a common misconception that the non-well-off in India do not know or care about privacy.Millions of men and women push back daily against the oppressive hold of their families and communities, and fight for the freedom to make their own choices. They may not have the right word for it, but they are creating space for themselves to exercise the right to privacy.It is in this context that one must understand the hearings in the Supreme Court on the right to privacy. Although the nine-judge bench has decided there is a fundamental right to privacy protected under the Constitution in the specific context of the Aadhaar case, privacy has many more dimensions than just data protection or surveillance by the state. A fundamental right to privacy, enshrined and protected in the Constitution, would mean that all persons have the right to be left alone by the state unless such intrusion is necessitated by a just, reasonable, and fair law. The implications of the judgment will go far beyond just the Aadhaar scheme and law. The law laid down by the Supreme Court on privacy could affect the course of development of the law governing reproductive rights, gay rights, beef bans, prohibition, among a host of other issues that the Indian state and society are grappling with.Q. Auto Shanker was conv icted of six murders and sentenced to death. While in jail, Shanker wrote his auto-biography and expressed his wish that this be published in the Blitz magazine. Before publishing the autobiography, Blitz announced the publication.Prison officials then forced Shanker to write to the magazine requesting that the auto-biography not be published. Blitz then brought the action to prevent the Prison officials from violating the magazines and the prisoners Freedom of Expression. In such a case, based on the authors reasoning, which will be the best option to strike the balance between the freedom of press vis-A-vis the right to privacy of the citizens.a)Blitz has the absolute right to publish which is safeguarded by the right to freedom of press, speech and expression.b)Blitz should not have any concern about the privacy claims of Auto Shanker in the interest of the public knowing a prisoners life.c)Auto Shanker privacy is paramount trumping any obstacle posed by the freedom of press of Blitz.d)Blitz has the right to publish insofar as it appears from the public records but this right cannot intrude into personal life endangering his privacy.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for The first thing to know when talking about privacy in India is that a majority of the population does not always understand what it means. It is at times confused with shame. Its also confused with the emotion we feel when we do something that does not meet our standards or our sense of what is right. Modern Indian languages do not seem to have an exact word which captures the meaning of privacy; theyre usually some variation of the words for isolation, intimacy or secrecy, once again hinting at a conceptual confusion.Privacy, however, is not only about hiding something or keeping it secret. It is, at its core, the right to be left alone. It doesnt mean that one is withdrawing from society. It is an expectation that society will not interfere in the choices made by the person so long as they do not cause harm to others. It means that ones right to eat whatever one chooses, the right to drink what one chooses, the right to love and marry whom one chooses, to wear what one chooses, among others, are rights which the state cannot interfere with. It is natural that the very concept of privacy seems incomprehensible. If you have grown up in a society where everything you do is dictated by someone else, and the cost of disobedience is high, to have the freedom to choose what you will in such important matters sounds like fantasy. But it is also a common misconception that the non-well-off in India do not know or care about privacy.Millions of men and women push back daily against the oppressive hold of their families and communities, and fight for the freedom to make their own choices. They may not have the right word for it, but they are creating space for themselves to exercise the right to privacy.It is in this context that one must understand the hearings in the Supreme Court on the right to privacy. Although the nine-judge bench has decided there is a fundamental right to privacy protected under the Constitution in the specific context of the Aadhaar case, privacy has many more dimensions than just data protection or surveillance by the state. A fundamental right to privacy, enshrined and protected in the Constitution, would mean that all persons have the right to be left alone by the state unless such intrusion is necessitated by a just, reasonable, and fair law. The implications of the judgment will go far beyond just the Aadhaar scheme and law. The law laid down by the Supreme Court on privacy could affect the course of development of the law governing reproductive rights, gay rights, beef bans, prohibition, among a host of other issues that the Indian state and society are grappling with.Q. Auto Shanker was conv icted of six murders and sentenced to death. While in jail, Shanker wrote his auto-biography and expressed his wish that this be published in the Blitz magazine. Before publishing the autobiography, Blitz announced the publication.Prison officials then forced Shanker to write to the magazine requesting that the auto-biography not be published. Blitz then brought the action to prevent the Prison officials from violating the magazines and the prisoners Freedom of Expression. In such a case, based on the authors reasoning, which will be the best option to strike the balance between the freedom of press vis-A-vis the right to privacy of the citizens.a)Blitz has the absolute right to publish which is safeguarded by the right to freedom of press, speech and expression.b)Blitz should not have any concern about the privacy claims of Auto Shanker in the interest of the public knowing a prisoners life.c)Auto Shanker privacy is paramount trumping any obstacle posed by the freedom of press of Blitz.d)Blitz has the right to publish insofar as it appears from the public records but this right cannot intrude into personal life endangering his privacy.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of The first thing to know when talking about privacy in India is that a majority of the population does not always understand what it means. It is at times confused with shame. Its also confused with the emotion we feel when we do something that does not meet our standards or our sense of what is right. Modern Indian languages do not seem to have an exact word which captures the meaning of privacy; theyre usually some variation of the words for isolation, intimacy or secrecy, once again hinting at a conceptual confusion.Privacy, however, is not only about hiding something or keeping it secret. It is, at its core, the right to be left alone. It doesnt mean that one is withdrawing from society. It is an expectation that society will not interfere in the choices made by the person so long as they do not cause harm to others. It means that ones right to eat whatever one chooses, the right to drink what one chooses, the right to love and marry whom one chooses, to wear what one chooses, among others, are rights which the state cannot interfere with. It is natural that the very concept of privacy seems incomprehensible. If you have grown up in a society where everything you do is dictated by someone else, and the cost of disobedience is high, to have the freedom to choose what you will in such important matters sounds like fantasy. But it is also a common misconception that the non-well-off in India do not know or care about privacy.Millions of men and women push back daily against the oppressive hold of their families and communities, and fight for the freedom to make their own choices. They may not have the right word for it, but they are creating space for themselves to exercise the right to privacy.It is in this context that one must understand the hearings in the Supreme Court on the right to privacy. Although the nine-judge bench has decided there is a fundamental right to privacy protected under the Constitution in the specific context of the Aadhaar case, privacy has many more dimensions than just data protection or surveillance by the state. A fundamental right to privacy, enshrined and protected in the Constitution, would mean that all persons have the right to be left alone by the state unless such intrusion is necessitated by a just, reasonable, and fair law. The implications of the judgment will go far beyond just the Aadhaar scheme and law. The law laid down by the Supreme Court on privacy could affect the course of development of the law governing reproductive rights, gay rights, beef bans, prohibition, among a host of other issues that the Indian state and society are grappling with.Q. Auto Shanker was conv icted of six murders and sentenced to death. While in jail, Shanker wrote his auto-biography and expressed his wish that this be published in the Blitz magazine. Before publishing the autobiography, Blitz announced the publication.Prison officials then forced Shanker to write to the magazine requesting that the auto-biography not be published. Blitz then brought the action to prevent the Prison officials from violating the magazines and the prisoners Freedom of Expression. In such a case, based on the authors reasoning, which will be the best option to strike the balance between the freedom of press vis-A-vis the right to privacy of the citizens.a)Blitz has the absolute right to publish which is safeguarded by the right to freedom of press, speech and expression.b)Blitz should not have any concern about the privacy claims of Auto Shanker in the interest of the public knowing a prisoners life.c)Auto Shanker privacy is paramount trumping any obstacle posed by the freedom of press of Blitz.d)Blitz has the right to publish insofar as it appears from the public records but this right cannot intrude into personal life endangering his privacy.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice The first thing to know when talking about privacy in India is that a majority of the population does not always understand what it means. It is at times confused with shame. Its also confused with the emotion we feel when we do something that does not meet our standards or our sense of what is right. Modern Indian languages do not seem to have an exact word which captures the meaning of privacy; theyre usually some variation of the words for isolation, intimacy or secrecy, once again hinting at a conceptual confusion.Privacy, however, is not only about hiding something or keeping it secret. It is, at its core, the right to be left alone. It doesnt mean that one is withdrawing from society. It is an expectation that society will not interfere in the choices made by the person so long as they do not cause harm to others. It means that ones right to eat whatever one chooses, the right to drink what one chooses, the right to love and marry whom one chooses, to wear what one chooses, among others, are rights which the state cannot interfere with. It is natural that the very concept of privacy seems incomprehensible. If you have grown up in a society where everything you do is dictated by someone else, and the cost of disobedience is high, to have the freedom to choose what you will in such important matters sounds like fantasy. But it is also a common misconception that the non-well-off in India do not know or care about privacy.Millions of men and women push back daily against the oppressive hold of their families and communities, and fight for the freedom to make their own choices. They may not have the right word for it, but they are creating space for themselves to exercise the right to privacy.It is in this context that one must understand the hearings in the Supreme Court on the right to privacy. Although the nine-judge bench has decided there is a fundamental right to privacy protected under the Constitution in the specific context of the Aadhaar case, privacy has many more dimensions than just data protection or surveillance by the state. A fundamental right to privacy, enshrined and protected in the Constitution, would mean that all persons have the right to be left alone by the state unless such intrusion is necessitated by a just, reasonable, and fair law. The implications of the judgment will go far beyond just the Aadhaar scheme and law. The law laid down by the Supreme Court on privacy could affect the course of development of the law governing reproductive rights, gay rights, beef bans, prohibition, among a host of other issues that the Indian state and society are grappling with.Q. Auto Shanker was conv icted of six murders and sentenced to death. While in jail, Shanker wrote his auto-biography and expressed his wish that this be published in the Blitz magazine. Before publishing the autobiography, Blitz announced the publication.Prison officials then forced Shanker to write to the magazine requesting that the auto-biography not be published. Blitz then brought the action to prevent the Prison officials from violating the magazines and the prisoners Freedom of Expression. In such a case, based on the authors reasoning, which will be the best option to strike the balance between the freedom of press vis-A-vis the right to privacy of the citizens.a)Blitz has the absolute right to publish which is safeguarded by the right to freedom of press, speech and expression.b)Blitz should not have any concern about the privacy claims of Auto Shanker in the interest of the public knowing a prisoners life.c)Auto Shanker privacy is paramount trumping any obstacle posed by the freedom of press of Blitz.d)Blitz has the right to publish insofar as it appears from the public records but this right cannot intrude into personal life endangering his privacy.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice Class 12 tests.