Prof. Shamnad Basheer filed a writ petition in the High Court of Delhi with regard to the violations of privacy due to the leaks of Aadhaar numbers. The petition will be heard after the conclusion of proceedings in the cases challenging the Aadhaar on Constitutional Grounds being heard by the 5 judge bench headed by CJI in the Supreme Court.

Shamnad Basheer v. UIDAI Final Writ Petition

Vidyut is a commentator on socio-political issues with a keen understanding of tech and policy. She has been observing and commenting on Aadhaar since 2010 from a perspective of human rights, democracy and technological robustness.

2 thoughts on “The Aadhaar verdict – A dark cloud with a slim silver lining”

  1. Ram Ram Vidyut: 1Petition st Thanks For Writing In Bold Letters Which Made Me Easy To Read And Understand. Looks SC Was Under Pressure Otherwise It Will Never Have Accepted A Civil Bill Paased As Money Bill. It Is Really Undemocratic. Justice Chandarchud Has Shown The Window. The Petitioners Should Immediately File A Review Petition Before GOI Makes Any Mischief. Thanks.

    1. The key to everything is 139AA, devoid of any logic whatsoever, turning ‘voluntary’ into mandatory [at least till people twig on]. In fact, Justice Sikri, in the Binoy Viswam Judgement says ‘when viewed harmoniously’ , the word ‘when’ leaving no doubt that there is another way of viewing it ! But nobody has taken notice of this word….Anyway,this is what I posted on the Mirror Now # Aadhaar Verdict page:
      More than the loss of data, I am worried about loss of logic from our minds! There are two distinct issues- 1. Enrollment for an Aadhaar number 2. Quoting the number [which can only be done IF one has obtained it] . The Aadhaar Act Section 3 says residents are ‘entitled’ to obtain an Aadhaar number and it is clear that an entitlement is always optional. If on booking a hotel room you are entitled to a free breakfast ,can the hotel force feed you breakfast if you do not wish to have breakfast ? Now, Section 139AA IT Act says those who are ‘eligible’ to obtain an Aadhaar number should quote the same in their Returns, making no distinction between those who have enrolled and those who have not enrolled. However, as far as I can see, the IT Section 139AA does NOT say that enrollment for an Aadhaar number is mandatory,yet an Aadhaar number is demanded. This kind of ‘logic’ effectively shows that one is being asked to quote a number that one does not have & is not bound by law to possess, since enrolling for an Aadhaar number is an entitlement – no more, no less. Going by the logic in Section 139AA, all ‘eligible’ bachelors could be compelled to quote the name of the spouse that they do not have or be forced to get married ,just because they are ‘eligible’ . Also, all those who are ‘eligible’ to drive a vehicle may be forced to drive… Clearly therefore, a sentence/Order that reads ‘quoting your Aadhaar number is mandatory’,means quoting your Aadhaar number IF you have enrolled for it. “Nemo dat quod non habet” [ no man can give what he himself does not possess].

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *