Aadhaar verdict in Supreme Court today live updates: The apex court on Wednesday ruled that the Aadhaar scheme is constitutionally valid, but did read down certain sections of the Act. Providing some relief to the common man, the Supreme Court ruled that Aadhaar will no longer be mandatory for getting new mobile connections, opening bank accounts, getting admission to schools, and to appear for University Grants Commission (UGC), Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE), National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) exams.
However, the court ruled that Aadhaar will remain essential for linkage with Permanent account number (PAN) and for filing Income tax returns (ITR). In a majority verdict, the top court observed that Aadhaar Act can be passed as Money Bill. However, it has struck down certain sections of Aadhaar Act like Sections 33(2), 47 and 57. The top court also said that private entities cannot demand or seek Aadhaar data from consumers.
There were 31 pleas filed in the matter. One of those was filed by former High Court judge K S Puttaswamy. The top court had reserved its verdict on May 10. The constitution bench Justices Ashok Bhushan, A K Sikri, A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud and Chief Justice Dipak Misra himself.
Noted Supreme Court advocate Prashan Bhushan said that the Supreme Court in its verdict struck down a few portions and read down others in the Aadhaar Act. 'It did not call it it unconstitutional, but said it is needed for getting subsidies in government schemes.'
Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), the competent authority responsible for the implementation of Aadhaar, has welcomed the historical and landmark majority judgement of the Supreme Court on Aadhaar. Earlier today, the top court upheld the constitutional validity of Aadhaar and accepted that there is a legitimate state aim in Aadhaar.
BJP leader Union minister Ravi Shankar Prasad today criticised the Congress party for its double standards on Aadhaar. Speaking to reporters here, Prasad said that the erstwhile Congress government under the leadership of Manmohan Singh had pioneered the scheme, but now they are dragging their feet and planning to move the SC again when the top court upholds the validity of Aadhaar.
Congress president Rahul Gandhi thanked the Supreme Court for its verdict on the Aadhaar Act. Rahul said that Aadhaar was an instrument of empowerment for his party, but a 'tool of oppression and surveillance' for the BJP.
BJP spokesperson Sambit Patra said that the judgment of the Supreme Court on Aadhaar is a big victory for the Modi government. Apart from upholding the constitutional validity of UIDAI, the court also stated that Aadhaar does not violate privacy.
"Everyone who has been criticizing Aadhaar should understand that they cannot defy technology. Mainstream should accept changes, one can understand the fringe being against," FM Jaitley said.
"By striking down Section 57 of Aadhaar Act, Supreme Court has firmly put an end to the mass surveillance exercise being carried out under the guise of Aadhaar by the Central Government and the grotesque distortion of an idea conceived by the UPA," senior leader and former Union Minister Kapil Sibal said.
"I am very happy with the judgement. It is a landmark and remarkable judgement," Attorney General KK Venugopal said.
"Mamata Banerjee had issued an open challenge on Aadhaar. Our stance has been vindicated. I'm glad the SC said what it said. On data privacy & data protection, that's also something we need to take a close look at, so the BJP can't make it into a policed state," TMC leader Derek O'Brien said.
Niti Aayog CEO Amitabh has said Supreme Court's judgement on Aadhaar is "good and progressive" one and claimed that the verdict will bring "efficiency" in the country. "The Supreme Court has said that this (Aadhaar) has stood the test of constitutionality," Niti Aayog CEO Kant said.
Finance Minister Arun Jaitley termed the Supreme Court's verdict on Aadhaar as 'historic order' and said the central government welcomed the decision. "Everyone who has been criticizing Aadhaar should understand that they cannot defy technology. Mainstream should accept changes, one can understand the fringe being against," FM Jaitley said.
As per figures accessed by PTI, a total of 21,08,16,676 PANs issued by the Income Tax Department have been linked with Aadhaar till September 24. The total operational or issued PANs are over 41.02 crore (41,02,66,969) as per the same time line, the data said.
Senior Advocates including Shyam Divan,Meenakshi Arora, Arvind Datar, Gopal Subramanium, KV Viswanathan, CU Singh, P Chidambaram, Sajan Poovayya, Sanjay Hegde and Anand Grover and advocate Prashant Bhushan appeared for the petitioners
Pronouncement concludes on the crucial Aadhaar verdict. The verdict has gone 4-1 in favour of Aadhaar. Next judgment on live streaming of Supreme Court proceedings. As a highlight, court has named a number of services which will not require Aadhaar as a mandatory document.
Ashok Bhushan J has started pronouncing his verdict. He concurs with majority judgment of AK Sikri but differs on three issues. Previously, Justice Chandrachud struk down the Aadhaar, saying that Centre should have approached the top court for variation of its orders.
In a big statement, Justice DY Chandrachud has said that Aadhaar Project is a wholly unconstitutional. The statement comes as a landmark dissent by Justice Chandrachud
Justice Chandrachud has criticised the Central government for passing notifications on Aadhaar in violation of interim orders of Supreme Court. Striking down the Aadhaar, Justice Chandrachud said that Centre should have approached the top court for variation of its orders.
Justice Chandrachud raised concern that "Aadhaar violates the right to privacy as it could possibly lead to profiling of persons and voters." Mandating Aadhaar for benefits and services under Section 7 would lead to a situation in which citizens will not be able to live without Aadhaar. Hence, Section 7 arbitrary and unconstitutional, Justice Chandrachud said.
Justice DY Chandrachud said that Aadhaar violates informational privacy and data protection. He also said that passing of bill as money bill when it does not qualify as a money bill is a fraud on Constitution. The procedure also violates Basic Structure, said Justice DY Chandrachud
The hearing went for 38 days, spanning four-and-half months. The apex court was informed by Attorney General K K Venugopal had informed that the hearing had become the 'second longest' one after the historic Kesavananda Bharati case of 1973, if days of hearing are taken into consideration.
Congress has welcomed the Supreme Court's decision on Aadhaar issue. 'We welcome the Supreme Court's decision to strike down Section 57 of the Aadhaar Act. Private entities are no longer allowed to use Aadhaar for verification purpose,' Congress posted on its twitter handle.
Supreme Court judge justice Sikri said that Aadhaar cannot be mandatory for bank accounts, mobile connections.
Justice Sikri said that Section 57 of Aadhaar Act is "unconstitutional" and it has been struck down by Majority Judgment.
Justice Sikri said that the Supreme Court satisfied that there was sufficient defence mechanism for authentication. However, Justice Sikri said, some provisions relating to authentication, including Section 33(2) of Aadhaar Act struck down".
Justic Sikri said that "the Jugdment also deals with Proportionality doctrine, compelling State interest and Strict Scrutiny Test." Talking about the judgment, Justic Sikri said that concept of Human dignity has been enlarged in it.
Justice Sikri said, "heavy reliance has been placed on Privacy judgment of 2017". He said, "The main plank of challenge to Aadhaar project and Aadhaar Act is that it infringes Right to Privacy."
Justice Sikri said, "Aadhaar eliminates any chance of duplication. Aadhaar empowers marginalized sections by giving them identity." Pitching for data collection, Justice Sikri said, "Minimal data is collected for establishing identity under Aaadhar. Uniqueness is the fundamental difference between Aadhaar and other identity proofs."
Justice AK Sikri has started reading judgment on behalf of himself and CJI Dipak Misra and Justice AM Khanwilkar. Sikri observed that "It is better to be unique than the best". Aadhaar has become the most talked about expression in the recent years, he said
"The judgement will have a far reaching effect because Aadhaar is relevant for a large number of subsidies. It is also relevant to plug loot and waste that has happened. I hope the judgement is in favour of Aadhaar," said Former Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi who had represented the government in Aadhaar case. "Data protection is very important and government has made it clear that it will protect the data. A law is also coming in this regard," said Rohatgi.
The Supreme Court is set to give its verdict on following questions- does the Centre have the right to seek/demand that every person authenticate his or her identity. Is the Aadhaar an attack on person's privacy, Is the Aadhaar Act valid?
The Kesavananda Bharati case which was heard by a 13-judge bench. The verdict was delivered by a majority of 7:6. It is said to be propounded the doctrine of the 'Basic Structure and of the Constitution'. It had held that the amendments which may affect this structure were subject to judicial review.
During the hearing Attorney General K K Venugopal informed the Supreme Court that it had become the "second longest" one in terms of days of hearing after the historic Kesavananda Bharati case of 1973.
The Supreme Court had countered the central government's move to make Aadhaar mandatory for mobile users. The top coirt said that the centre had misinterpreted its earlier order. The apex court was also against with the government's contention that the Aadhaar law was correctly termed as a Money Bill by the Lok Sabha Speaker as it dealt with "targeted delivery of subsidies" for which funds came from the Consolidated Fund of India, as per reports
During the marathon hearing, the central government had backed its move to link adhaar numbers with mobile phones. The centre informed the top court that it could have been hauled up for contempt if the verification of mobile users was not undertaken by it. The central government had said that the law was valid and allowed minimal invasion to ensure the right to life of millions of Indians by ensuring seamless delivery of subsidies, benefits and services to the poorest of poor.
Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits And Services) Act, 2016 was backed firmly the central government, the Unique Identificaiton Authority of India (UIDAI), the governments of Maharashtra and Gujarat and the RBI. The Attorney General, Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, senior advocates Rakesh Dwivedi and Jayant Bhushan and lawyer Zoheb Hossain had represented the aforementioned parties
The principal argument against the Aadhaar scheme in the top court was that it violated the nine-judge bench verdict that had observed that 'Right to Privacy' is a fundamental right under the Constitution. The legal counsel for one of the petitioners had called Aadhaar as "an electronic leash" and said that the Centre could completely destroy an individual by "switching off" the 12-digit unique identifier number.
Around 31 pleas were filed in the matter. Senior advocates like Shyam Divan, Gopal Subramaniam, Kapil Sibal, P Chidambaram, Arvind Datar, K V Vishwanath, Anand Grover, Sajan Poovayya had argued against the Aadhaar Scheme on various grounds. Key petitioners are former High Court judge K S Puttaswamy, Magsaysay awardee Shanta Sinha, feminist researcher Kalyani Sen Menon, social activists Aruna Roy, Nikhil De, Nachiket Udupa and CPI leader Binoy Visman.