Syllabus: GS2/Governance
Context
- Recently, the Supreme Court has directed the Election Commission of India (ECI) to accept Aadhaar as a valid identity document for the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar.
| Background: Bihar’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) – It is a de novo exercise to update the electoral rolls in Bihar ahead of the upcoming Assembly elections. – It involves house-to-house verification and requires voters to submit documentation proving their identity and citizenship. – It is being carried out under Section 21 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 (RP Act), which authorises the EC to undertake special revisions at any time for reasons recorded in writing. Supreme Court’s Observations – The Supreme Court’s prima facie view was that Aadhaar, along with voter ID (EPIC) and ration card, should be added to the existing list of 11 documents accepted for verification. – It brings the total to 12 documents, offering greater flexibility to voters, especially those enrolled after 2003 who need to establish their date and place of birth to confirm citizenship. – However, it also noted that while Aadhaar has wide coverage and utility, it does not establish citizenship. |
About Aadhaar
- It was launched in 2009 and later given statutory backing through the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016, passed as a Money Bill in Parliament.
- It empowered the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) under the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) to issue 12-digit Aadhaar numbers and regulate its use for authentication and service delivery.
- It captures biometric (fingerprints and iris scans) and demographic data to create a unique identity for each resident.
- Aadhaar has been issued to over 1.3 billion residents, making it the world’s largest biometric ID system, as of 2025.
Supreme Court on Aadhaar
- Right to Privacy Judgment (2017): A nine-judge bench of the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that privacy is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution.
- It laid the groundwork for evaluating Aadhaar’s constitutionality, especially regarding data protection and surveillance concerns, and overturned earlier rulings that denied privacy as a fundamental right.
- Aadhaar Verdict (2018): A five-judge bench upheld the constitutional validity of Aadhaar, but with significant caveats.
- The Supreme Court of India upheld:
- Aadhaar is valid for welfare schemes and subsidies.
- The Aadhaar Act passed as a Money Bill was deemed constitutionally acceptable.
- Aadhaar promotes good governance and empowers marginalized communities.
- It struck down or limited the use of Aadhaar as a mandatory requirement for bank accounts, mobile SIM cards, and school admissions.
- The national security exception in the Aadhaar Act was struck down.
- Aadhaar is not proof of citizenship or date of birth.
- It emphasized that Aadhaar collects minimal data, and UIDAI’s architecture does not enable surveillance or profiling.
- The Supreme Court of India upheld:
Recent Developments and Clarifications
- The Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO) recently removed Aadhaar from its list of acceptable documents for verifying date of birth.
- The Registrar General of India (RGI) clarified that Aadhaar is not mandatory for birth or death registration under the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969.
- Aadhaar continues to be accepted voluntarily, but with safeguards — such as masking the first eight digits when used in sensitive databases.
Previous article
Special Bulletin on Maternal Mortality in India 2021-23
Next article
Submarine Cables
