The Supreme Court asked MeitY to treat a public interest litigation as a formal representation. This is to seek a stronger mechanism for recovering or destroying stolen personal data of Indian citizens held abroad.
Supreme Court Tells MeitY To Look Into Stolen Indian Data Sitting On Foreign Servers
A PIL flagged data stolen across five countries being used to extort Indians. The Supreme Court heard it, acknowledged it was serious, and sent it straight to MeitY.

- Supreme Court directs government to consider data protection plea.
- PIL seeks stronger mechanism for citizen data recovery abroad.
- Court deems data theft issue technical, refers to ministry.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) to treat a public interest litigation as a formal representation, seeking a stronger mechanism to recover or destroy personal data of Indian citizens allegedly stolen and held on servers abroad. A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M. Pancholi was hearing the PIL filed by Nitish Kumar, a cyber security consultant.
The court declined to entertain the petition directly, with the CJI noting it was largely a technical matter and directing the petitioner to take his concerns to the government instead.
What Did The PIL Ask For And Why Did The Court Step Back?
The petition sought the court's intervention to operationalise the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023, and to address the rise of "digital arrests" and extortion linked to data breaches.
Kumar submitted that data stolen by entities in at least five foreign countries is being used against Indian citizens, with sensitive information such as fingerprints and personal identifiers being exploited to carry out transnational crimes.
ALSO READ: YouTube Is Removing Subscriptions Tab From Its Mobile App: Here Is Where It Goes Next
While the bench acknowledged the seriousness of the concerns, it observed that the issues were "highly technical" and required administrative and technological expertise rather than judicial intervention at this stage.
"The issue being highly technical in nature, it seems to us that an effective course will be to approach the Ministry of Electronics and IT. Let this plea be given as a supplementary representation. They shall consider it," the bench said.
What Happens Next With The Data Protection Petition?
The plea had also sought the formation of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to monitor data theft investigations and called on the Centre to recover or destroy stolen personal data from foreign jurisdictions.
ALSO READ: We Saw PlayStation Plus Price Go Up Before GTA 6: These Are The New Costs
On the question of bringing accused parties to justice, the bench noted: "Unless there's an extradition treaty," the accused cannot be brought here to face the law. Disposing of the plea, the court granted Kumar the liberty to submit the petition as a supplementary representation to MeitY.
Before You Go
Apple creates a new record in iPhone sales after launch of iPhone 16 | ABP Paisa Live
Frequently Asked Questions
What did the Supreme Court ask the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) to do?
Why did the Supreme Court decline to entertain the petition directly?
The court found the matter to be largely technical, requiring administrative and technological expertise. They directed the petitioner to take his concerns to the government instead.
What were the main concerns raised in the public interest litigation?
The PIL sought the operationalization of the DPDP Act and addressed 'digital arrests' and extortion due to data breaches. It highlighted the use of stolen Indian citizen data for transnational crimes.
What happens to the petition now?
The petitioner can submit his plea as a supplementary representation to MeitY. The court granted him this liberty to pursue the matter with the ministry.

























