 "Aadhaar cannot be mandatory: SC")
The Supreme Court on Monday directed the central government not to share Aadhaar card details with any agency without the consent of the card holder. It also asked the government to immediately withdraw all orders which had made the card compulsory for registration of marriage or property or availing of the subsidy on cooking gas cylinders or for any other service.
The court reiterated its order of September last year that no one should suffer for not having the card. A bench of judges B S Chauhan and J Chelameswar passed the order in a case from Goa involving gang rape. A court there had asked the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) to share the biometric data of residents in the state to crack the case. The authority petitioned the high court at Mumbai against this but the latter did not prevent the sharing of Aadhaar details with the probe agency.
Solicitor General Mohan Parasaran, who argued for UIDAI, was told by the judges that they were receiving a number of letters complaining the government was insisting on an Aadhaar card for providing services despite the September order. “You issue instructions withdrawing the notifications making the Aadhaar card mandatory for availing of services,” the court said. Parasaran, who also represented the government said, “We will do it immediately.” The court observed it had already passed an order in this regard and it should be strictly implemented.
The apex court has been hearing for some time a challenge to the validity of the Aadhaar scheme, moved in several public interest petitions. The hearings are yet to be completed.
The privacy issue, one of the main attacks on the scheme, was highlighted in this case of the gang rape of a seven-year-old girl in a school 14 months earlier. The investigators have some fingerprints and they want the Aadhaar cards of all residents to ascertain the identity of the suspects. The card is supposed to be the authoritative record for fingerprints, iris and facial images.
UIDAI told the Supreme Court if the high court upheld the Goa court order, it would open a floodgate of such demands by courts and other authorities. It said the UIDAI system was developed “for civilian use and for non-forensic purposes”. If the data is used for non-civilian purposes, it would affect scores of innocent people, the appeal said.
Sharing information with other agencies would violate a person’s right to privacy, since the current data sharing policy and guidelines clearly provided that biometric data cannot be shared without the consent of a resident, it was argued.
The court reiterated its order of September last year that no one should suffer for not having the card. A bench of judges B S Chauhan and J Chelameswar passed the order in a case from Goa involving gang rape. A court there had asked the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) to share the biometric data of residents in the state to crack the case. The authority petitioned the high court at Mumbai against this but the latter did not prevent the sharing of Aadhaar details with the probe agency.
Solicitor General Mohan Parasaran, who argued for UIDAI, was told by the judges that they were receiving a number of letters complaining the government was insisting on an Aadhaar card for providing services despite the September order. “You issue instructions withdrawing the notifications making the Aadhaar card mandatory for availing of services,” the court said. Parasaran, who also represented the government said, “We will do it immediately.” The court observed it had already passed an order in this regard and it should be strictly implemented.
More From This Section
While staying the high court order, the Supreme Court issued notice to the Central Bureau of Investigation, which is probing the gang rape, seeking its response to the UIDAI petition.
The apex court has been hearing for some time a challenge to the validity of the Aadhaar scheme, moved in several public interest petitions. The hearings are yet to be completed.
The privacy issue, one of the main attacks on the scheme, was highlighted in this case of the gang rape of a seven-year-old girl in a school 14 months earlier. The investigators have some fingerprints and they want the Aadhaar cards of all residents to ascertain the identity of the suspects. The card is supposed to be the authoritative record for fingerprints, iris and facial images.
UIDAI told the Supreme Court if the high court upheld the Goa court order, it would open a floodgate of such demands by courts and other authorities. It said the UIDAI system was developed “for civilian use and for non-forensic purposes”. If the data is used for non-civilian purposes, it would affect scores of innocent people, the appeal said.
Sharing information with other agencies would violate a person’s right to privacy, since the current data sharing policy and guidelines clearly provided that biometric data cannot be shared without the consent of a resident, it was argued.