Published: Wed, September 26, 2018
Worldwide | By Lisa Hogan

Supreme Court upholds Aadhaar but curbs use

Supreme Court upholds Aadhaar but curbs use

Mobile Numbers: Earlier in its order it said that to get a new SIM card and also for existing mobile number holders, Aadhaar was compulsory.

Justice Sikri's judgment also upheld Section 139AA OF Income Tax Act. The Aadhaar number will not be mandatory for UGC, NEET and CBSE Exams.

"We welcome the Supreme Court's decision to strike down Section 57 of the Aadhaar Act".

"It is better to be unique than to be best", he added.

The bench also said there was nothing in the Aadhaar Act that violates right to privacy of an individual.

Addressing a press conference in the national capital, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader hit out at the critics of Aadhaar, saying those criticising the unique identification scheme need to understand that they "cannot defy technology". "Private entities are no longer allowed to use Aadhaar for verification purposes", the Congress said on Twitter minutes after the verdict.

According to Compendium of Regulations of the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), "The Aadhaar number holder may, at any time, revoke consent given to a KUA for storing his e-KYC data or for sharing it with third parties, and upon such revocation, the KUA shall delete the e-KYC data and cease any further sharing".

Linking of Aadhaar with bank accounts - Not mandatory. Paytm, the largest mobile wallet in the country received a lot of flak for mandating Aadhaar linking before the final verdict was passed.

The court has also struck down Section 47 of the legislation that barred individuals from filing complaints in case of a breach of their data.

On asked if it is a setback, since the majority of judges ruling that Aadhaar is a money Bill, Mr. Sibal said: "No, it is not setback as striking down the Act would have deprived the marginalized sections".

Maintaining that the Prevention of Money Laundering Act Rules proceeded on assumption that every bank account holder is a money launderer, he said the assumption that every individual who opens a bank account is a potential terrorist or a launderer is "draconian", he said. A five-judge Constitution Bench comprising CJI Dipak Misra and Justices AK Sikri, AM Khanwilkar, Ashok Bhushan and DY Chandrachud heard the petitions for 38 days over a period of four months.

As part of the petitioners' arguments against Aadhaar, its architecture was criticized on the grounds of it leading to a surveillance state by tracking people or profiling their personal data.

The first of the three judgments was pronounced by Justice A K Sikri. That is why, Patra added, the Congress had moved the apex court against it.

The Supreme Court is likely to pronounce its verdict on a batch of petitions seeking that a seven-judge bench reconsiders the court's 2006 judgement which had put conditions for granting quota benefits in job promotions for SC/ST employees.

Like this: