AI and Mass Surveillance in India: A Critical Analysis through the Lens of Doctrine of Proportionality

The constitutional legitimacy of State surveillance in India has traditionally been assessed in the context of targeted intrusions into individual liberty. The emergence of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has unsettled this framework by enabling forms of mass surveillance that are continuous, automated, and structurally embedded within governance processes. AI-driven surveillance systems, such as facial recognition technologies, predictive policing tools, and large-scale data analytics, recalibrate the scale and intensity of State monitoring in ways that raise foundational constitutional questions. This paper examines the compatibility of AI-enabled mass surveillance with the Indian Constitution, with particular reference to Articles 14, 19, and 21, through the doctrine of proportionality. Following the recognition of the right to privacy as a fundamental right in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017), proportionality has emerged as the central standard governing judicial review of state action that infringes rights. The paper analyses the four-pronged proportionality test that includes legality, legitimate aim, necessity, and balancing, as articulated in Modern Dental College v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2016) and subsequently applied in Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020). It argues that the opacity, predictive capacity, and potential for function creep inherent in AI systems intensify risks of arbitrariness, discrimination, and chilling effects on fundamental freedoms. The paper contends that conventional applications of proportionality, developed in the context of discrete regulatory measures, are insufficient to address the cumulative and systemic harms of mass algorithmic surveillance. The paper adopts a doctrinal and analytical approach grounded in constitutional provisions, Supreme Court jurisprudence, and contemporary scholarly literature