The Court held that the right to privacy, being an inherently personal right, does not survive after death and that legal heirs may administer the deceased’s digital estate in the absence of a nominee under the DPDP Act, 2023.
Gandhinagar Court Recognises iCloud Data As Part Of Deceased Person’s Estate
A Civil Court in Gandhinagar has recognised digital data stored in a deceased person’s Apple iCloud account as part of the deceased’s estate under the Indian Succession Act, 1925.
The order came from the Court of the 3rd Additional Senior Civil Judge, Himanshu Choudhary, on May 5, 2026. The case arose from a petition filed by Smt. Sadhna Shaishav Shah and Ms. Sur Shaishav Shah. They sought Letters of Administration for the estate of Late Shri Shaishav Dineshbhai Shah.
The petition was filed under Sections 218, 219, 220, 278 and 283 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925. The estate included an Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max and the linked Apple ID and iCloud account. Advocate J. J. Bhatt represented the petitioners.
Deceased Died Without A Will
According to the petitioners, Late Shri Shaishav Dineshbhai Shah died intestate on April 24, 2025, at Gandhinagar, Gujarat. He did not leave behind a Will or any testamentary document.
He was survived by two Class-I legal heirs. They were his wife, Smt. Sadhna Shaishav Shah, aged 58 years, and his daughter, Ms. Sur Shaishav Shah, aged 33 years.
The petitioners informed the Court that the deceased owned and used an Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max purchased on July 2, 2022. The device was linked to an Apple Account and iCloud account.
According to the petition, the iCloud account stored valuable personal data. This included photographs, videos, documents, voice notes, and contact lists. The petitioners argued that the data carried emotional, sentimental, and practical value.
Apple Required Court Authorisation
The petitioners approached Apple and requested access to the deceased’s digital estate. Apple informed them that it could help reset passwords or security credentials for access to iCloud data. However, the company stated that it could not recover data stored only on the physical device.
Apple also required a court order appointing a legal representative or administrator of the deceased’s estate. The company sought declarations confirming that the deceased used the account and that the authorised representative could lawfully request access to the data.
No Objections Filed Against Petition
The Court directed publication of a public notice under Section 283 of the Indian Succession Act. The notice invited objections from interested persons within 30 days.
The notice appeared in the newspaper Sandesh on February 5, 2026. No person filed objections within the prescribed period.
During the proceedings, Smt. Sadhna Shaishav Shah submitted a no-objection affidavit. She stated that she had no objection to the appointment of her daughter as the sole Administrator and Legal Personal Representative of the estate.
The Court accepted the request and considered it appropriate to appoint the daughter as administrator of the estate.
Petitioners Argued Digital Data Is Property
The petitioners argued that Indian law already recognises digital data as a form of property. They relied on the definition of movable property under Section 2(36) of the General Clauses Act, 1897, and Section 2(21) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
They also referred to Sections 43 and 66 of the Information Technology Act, 2000. These provisions penalise unauthorised access, copying, and misuse of data.
Further, the petitioners relied on Section 2(1)(v) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The provision includes incorporeal and intangible assets within the meaning of property.
The petitioners also referred to Section 2(47A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The provision recognises Virtual Digital Assets. Based on these provisions, the petitioners argued that digital assets form part of a deceased person’s estate and can pass to legal heirs.
Court Examined Privacy And Digital Rights
The petitioners relied on the decision in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India and argued that the right to privacy is personal in nature.
They also referred to Krishna Kishore Singh v. Sarla A. Saraogi and Ruba Ahmed v. Hansal Mehta. In those decisions, the Delhi High Court held that privacy rights do not survive after death and cannot pass to legal heirs.
The petitioners further relied on Section 14 of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023. The provision allows a person to nominate someone to exercise data-related rights after death.
They argued that, in the absence of such nomination, legal heirs should receive authority to manage and access the deceased person’s digital data for estate administration purposes.
Court Recognised Digital Data As Estate Property
After considering the submissions, the Court held that the digital data stored in the deceased’s Apple iCloud account formed part of the deceased’s estate. The Court also held that the data qualified as a valuable digital asset capable of administration under the Indian Succession Act, 1925.
The Court observed that Indian law adopts a broad understanding of movable and intangible property. According to the Court, the legal framework is wide enough to include digital data within the concept of property.
On the issue of privacy, the Court held that the right to privacy does not survive death. The Court applied the maxim actio personalis moritur cum persona and stated that privacy claims cannot prevent lawful heirs from administering the digital estate of a deceased person.
The Court further held that where no nominee exists under Section 14 of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, the right to manage and access digital data devolves upon legal heirs for the limited purpose of estate administration.
Court Granted Letters Of Administration
The Court allowed the petition under Section 278 of the Indian Succession Act. It granted Letters of Administration in favour of Ms. Sur Shaishav Shah with the consent of Smt. Sadhna Shaishav Shah. The order covered the Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max and the associated Apple ID and iCloud account.
The Court also directed Apple Distribution International Limited and its affiliates to assist the administrator in recovering the deceased’s data. Further, the company must provide technical assistance, wherever feasible, for recovery of data stored on the physical device.
Finally, the Court clarified that the order did not determine ownership or title over the assets. The order only authorised administration of the digital estate according to law.
