Petitioners argue the law quietly shields *all* personal info; even if it’s about public officials or welfare schemes; by removing earlier safeguards. This could let authorities block access to charge sheets or scheme data just by tagging it “personal.” Advocates like Vrinda Grover and Prashant Bhushan warn it upsets the balance between privacy and public accountability. Journalists are especially concerned; no specific exemption means investigative reports could now require consent or face erasure requests. The Court must decide: does the DPDP Act override RTI? Or can both coexist? The Centre has two weeks to respond. This isn’t just legal jargon; it’s about whether citizens still have the right to know what their government does.