Former judge who opposed Aadhaar, welcomes verdict
Judgesspeak
Justice AK Sikri, writing for himself Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice AM Khanwilkar
It is better to be unique than the best. Because, being the best makes you the number one, but being unique makes you the only one
Retired Karnataka high court judge KS Puttaswamy, 92, who challenged the validity of the Aadhaar Act, welcomed the Supreme Court’s verdict on Wednesday, upholding the constitutionality of Aadhaar, and said it appears to be fair and reasonable.
Puttaswamy’s name is already enshrined in Constitutional law. A constitutional case, related to an individual’s fundamental right to privacy stemmed from his 2012 Aadhaar case, and in 2017, the Supreme Court, ruling in the Puttaswamy vs Union of India case, upheld privacy as a fundamental right of all Indians. Many experts said that seminal ruling on privacy, made it clear that Section 377 could not be defended; and sure enough, the apex court recently wrote down that section.
Addressing the press at his residence in Bengaluru, the nonagenarian, who, in 2012 challenged the decision to make Aadhaar enrolment mandatory for all citizens -- it was the first challenge to Aadhaar -- said he is yet to read the entire judgment and also the dissenting judgment.
“I have not read the full judgement. But from what has appeared on TV... My own view is the Aadhaar Act appears to be necessary particularly in cracking down financial criminals,” Puttaswamy said. “But for ordinary citizens it is not of much benefit and it is not in any way useful to the state as well,” he added.
“On the whole, it appears that the judgment is fair and reasonable. We can’t say that the judgment suffers from any serious
Minimal demographic and biometric data of citizens are collected by UIDAI for Aadhaar enrolment. We are of the view that there are sufficient safeguard to protect data collected under Aadhaar scheme BENGALURU: I have not read the full judgement. But from what has appeared on TV... My own view is the Aadhaar Act appears to be necessary particularly in cracking down financial criminals... for ordinary citizens it’s not of much benefit and it’s not in any way useful to the state
KS PUTTASWAMY, Retired HC judge
lapses that are found under the Constitution, particularly Article 19, which guarantees certain rights to individuals,” Puttaswamy said.
Regarding the majority judgment upholding the mandatory clause of Aadhaar for filing income tax, Puttaswamy said this is justified. “We must adhere to the mandatory provision for filing income tax... In my view this is not wrong because those who file returns earn well and they have to adhere to this provision,” he said.
“This is because this group is very small compared to the whole population, it’s probably just about 15 million. These numbers are laughable,” he said.