Balancing National Security and Personal Liberty

The relationship between national security and individual liberty presents one of the most challenging questions in contemporary constitutional governance. This paper examines the tension between the State's legitimate responsibility to protect national security and the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. Focusing on the increasing use of digital restrictions during political and student protests, it explores how peaceful dissent may be portrayed as a threat to national security and thereby become subject to measures such as social media blocking, internet shutdowns, surveillance, and criminal proceedings. The paper traces the expansion of Article 21 from its earlier interpretation to its modern understanding encompassing personal liberty, informational privacy, and digital freedoms, particularly through Maneka Gandhi and Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India. It further considers the significance of Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India and the constitutional principle of proportionality in evaluating restrictions on digital communication. The study argues that national security cannot become a blanket justification for disproportionate interference with constitutional freedoms. It proposes stronger institutional safeguards, independent review of surveillance and blocking orders, narrowly tailored security exemptions, and mandatory proportionality assessments before imposing digital restrictions. Ultimately, the paper emphasises that genuine national security must operate within, rather than outside, the constitutional framework protecting individual liberty.