The Indian government is pushing for the Aadhaar app to be pre-installed on new smartphones and devices to improve accessibility and digital convenience for citizens. The UIDAI says the move will make identity verification faster, safer, and more seamless across services like banking, telecom, and government schemes.


Indian Govt Seeks Aadhar App On New Devices | UIDAI Says Move will Improve Access

The Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) has deactivated over 20 million Aadhaar numbers belonging to deceased individuals as part of a nationwide initiative to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the Aadhaar database. The clean-up effort is aimed at preventing identity misuse and ensuring that government benefits reach the rightful beneficiaries, the government said on Wednesday (26 Nov).

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">UIDAI has deactivated more than 2 crore Aadhaar numbers of deceased individuals as part of a nationwide effort to maintain the continued accuracy of the Aadhaar database. UIDAI has sourced deceased persons data from Registrar General of India (RGI), States/UTs, Public… <a href="https://t.co/IOb0b9JBMY">pic.twitter.com/IOb0b9JBMY</a>&mdash; Aadhaar (@UIDAI) <a href="https://twitter.com/UIDAI/status/1993663322953064927?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 26, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

The authority carried out the drive sourcing deceased person data from government bodies like Registrar General of India (RGI), data from state and union territories governments, several central ministries and departments. UIDAI said it is also looking to collaborate with financial institutions and other such entities to get deceased persons' data.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/-this-is-what-our-kids-get-in-return-noida-woman-shares-emotional-ordeal-as-son-s-health-worsens-due-to-delhi-ncr-toxic-air-1764230989400">'This is what our kids get in return': Noida woman shares emotional ordeal as son's health worsens due to Delhi-NCR 'toxic air'</a>&nbsp;It clarified that no Aadhaar number can be reassigned to another individual. The clean-up process is carried out to ensure the identity of deceased persons is not misused in committing fraud and availing welfare schemes.<h2>How to report death of a family member</h2>The authority in the press release said that it had launched a facility earlier this year to report the death of a family member on the myAadhar portal. It is currently available across 25 states and Union territories using the Civil Registration System for reporting deaths; the process of integrating the remaining states with the portal is in progress. The family member, after authenticating themselves, is required to provide their Aadhaar number and Death Registration Number along with other demographic details of the deceased person on the portal. After the due process of validation of the information submitted by the family member, the authority will take action on deactivate.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/are-you-a-social-media-creator-brace-for-control-as-indian-top-court-asks-govt-on-regulation-mechanisms-1764238797065">Are you a social media creator? Brace for control, as Indian top court asks government on regulation&nbsp;mechanisms</a>&nbsp;UIDAI’s effort to remove Aadhaar numbers of deceased individuals began in 2024 and was scaled up through 2025. By mid-July this year, over 11.7 million had been deactivated, rising to about 14 million by September as the authority moved toward its year-end target of &nbsp;20 million.&nbsp;

The clean-up process is carried out to ensure the identity of deceased persons is not misused in committing fraud and availing welfare schemes.

The Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) has deactivated over 20 million Aadhaar numbers belonging to deceased individuals as part of a nationwide initiative to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the Aadhaar database. The clean-up effort is aimed at preventing identity misuse and ensuring that government benefits reach the rightful beneficiaries, the government said on Wednesday (26 Nov).

The clean-up process is carried out to ensure the identity of deceased persons is not misused in committing fraud and availing welfare schemes.

Over 20 million Aadhaar IDs deactivated in nationwide cleanup drive

Scams are on the rise as hackers and malicious minds are innovating with new phishing tactics. The government of India has hence warned citizens to be extra careful when it comes to their Aadhaar cards. The UIDAI which is the governing body of Aadhaar has issued a warning about the rising number of frauds and scams related to the Aadhaar card.

India: Aadhaar card scams on the rise

The Modi government has asked Indian citizens to avoid sharing photocopy of Aadhaar card in a new advsiory.

"Do not share a photocopy of your Aadhaar with any organisation as it can be misused. Alternatively, please use a masked Aadhaar which displays only the last four digits of your Aadhaar number," the government said in a press release.

To download this version, Indian citizens can select “Do you want a masked Aadhaar” option on the official website of Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI).

According to the notice issued by the Union Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, unlicensed private entities are like hotels and film halls are not allowed to collect or keep copies of Aadhaar card.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/aadhar-card-needed-to-stop-ghost-transactions-terror-funding-govt-to-supreme-court-15159">Also read |&nbsp;Aadhar card needed to stop ghost transactions, terror funding: Govt to Supreme Court</a>

"Only those organisations that have obtained a User License from the Unique Identification Authority of India can use Aadhaar for establishing the identity of a person," the government stated.

Before sharing Aadhar cards with any organisation, Indian citizens should verify if it has a valid user license from UIDAI.

Advising people to avoid using public computers for downloading their Aadhar cards, the advisory said that "If you do so, please ensure that you delete all the downloaded copies of e-Aadhaar permanently from that computer."

To verify any Aadhar card number online people can visit myaadhaar.uidai.gov.in/verifyAadhaar and for offline verficiation, they can scan the QR code on e-Aadhaar or Aadhaar letter or Aadhaar PVC card using QR code scanner in the mAadhaar mobile application.

Aadhaar is a biometric identification card that is becoming integral to the digitisation of India’s economy, with over 1.1 billion users and the world’s biggest database.

Indians have been asked to furnish their Aadhaar numbers for a host of transactions including accessing bank accounts, paying taxes, receiving subsidies, acquiring a mobile number, settling a property deal, and registering a marriage. 
&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)

WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us <a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.

The Modi government has asked Indian citizens to avoid sharing photocopy of Aadhaar card in a new advsiory. "Do not share a photocopy of your Aadhaar with any organisation as it can be misused.

The Modi government has asked Indian citizens to avoid sharing photocopy of Aadhaar card in a new advsiory. "Do not share a photocopy of your Aadhaar with any organisation as it can be misused. Alternatively, please use a masked Aadhaar which displays only the last four digits of your Aadhaar number," the government said in a press release. To download this version, Indian citizens can select “Do you want a masked Aadhaar” option on the official website of Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI). According to the notice issued by the Union Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, unlicensed private entities are like hotels and film halls are not allowed to collect or keep copies of Aadhaar card. Also read | Aadhar card needed to stop ghost transactions, terror funding: Govt to Supreme Court "Only those organisations that have obtained a User License from the Unique Identification Authority of India can use Aadhaar for establishing the identity of a person," the government stated. Before sharing Aadhar cards with any organisation, Indian citizens should verify if it has a valid user license from UIDAI. Advising people to avoid using public computers for downloading their Aadhar cards, the advisory said that "If you do so, please ensure that you delete all the downloaded copies of e-Aadhaar permanently from that computer." To verify any Aadhar card number online people can visit myaadhaar.uidai.gov.in/verifyAadhaar and for offline verficiation, they can scan the QR code on e-Aadhaar or Aadhaar letter or Aadhaar PVC card using QR code scanner in the mAadhaar mobile application. Aadhaar is a biometric identification card that is becoming integral to the digitisation of India’s economy, with over 1.1 billion users and the world’s biggest database. Indians have been asked to furnish their Aadhaar numbers for a host of transactions including accessing bank accounts, paying taxes, receiving subsidies, acquiring a mobile number, settling a property deal, and registering a marriage. (With inputs from agencies) WATCH WION LIVE HERE You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here.

Modi government asks Indian citizens to avoid sharing photocopy of Aadhaar

Supreme Court on Friday issued notices to the Central government and The Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) on a petition challenging the constitutional validity of Aadhaar ordinance for permitting voluntary use of Aadhaar as identity proof for opening bank accounts and procuring mobile phone connections.

A Bench of Justice Sharad Arvind Bobde and Justice Bhushan Ramkrishna Gavai asked the Centre and UIDAI to file reply on the plea by retired Indian Army Officers SG Vombatkare and Human Rights activist Bezwada Wilson.

The petition filed by advocate Vipin Nair said that the Aadhaar Ordinance creates a "backdoor to permit private parties" to access the Aadhaar eco-system, thus enabling state and private surveillance of citizens.

The petition added that the Ordinance and regulations permit the commercial exploitation of personal and sensitive information which has been collected and stored for state purposes only.

It sought a direction that private entities which have access to the Aadhaar database are under a public duty to ensure that Aadhaar numbers and the data available through the Aadhaar database are not stored by these private entities.

The petition sought direction "to declare the Aadhaar (Pricing of Aadhaar Authentication Services) Regulations, 2019 as ultra vires, unconstitutional, null and void, and in particular violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India."

Supreme Court on Friday issued notices to the Central government and The Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) on a petition challenging the constitutional validity of Aadhaar ordinance for permitting voluntary use of Aadhaar as identity proof for opening bank accounts and procuring mobile phone connections.

Supreme Court on Friday issued notices to the Central government and The Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) on a petition challenging the constitutional validity of Aadhaar ordinance for permitting voluntary use of Aadhaar as identity proof for opening bank accounts and procuring mobile phone connections. A Bench of Justice Sharad Arvind Bobde and Justice Bhushan Ramkrishna Gavai asked the Centre and UIDAI to file reply on the plea by retired Indian Army Officers SG Vombatkare and Human Rights activist Bezwada Wilson. The petition filed by advocate Vipin Nair said that the Aadhaar Ordinance creates a "backdoor to permit private parties" to access the Aadhaar eco-system, thus enabling state and private surveillance of citizens. The petition added that the Ordinance and regulations permit the commercial exploitation of personal and sensitive information which has been collected and stored for state purposes only. It sought a direction that private entities which have access to the Aadhaar database are under a public duty to ensure that Aadhaar numbers and the data available through the Aadhaar database are not stored by these private entities. The petition sought direction "to declare the Aadhaar (Pricing of Aadhaar Authentication Services) Regulations, 2019 as ultra vires, unconstitutional, null and void, and in particular violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India."

Supreme Court issues notices to Centre, UIDAI on petition challenging Aadhar ordinance

Nearly 123 crore <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/aadhaar-not-compulsory-with-bank-accounts-mobiles-cabinet-approves-amendments-184906">Aadhaar cards </a>have been issued to people, Union Minister Hansraj Ahir said in the Rajya Sabha on Wednesday.

Replying to a written question, Ahir said as per the 2011 census, the population of India is 121,08,54,977.

The UIDAI has issued a total of 122.90 crore Aadhaar cards as on November 30, 2018, he said, adding that 6.71 crore cards were issued to children below five years of age and 29.02 crore cards were given to people in the age group of 5 to 18 years.

Ahir said the number of children born within the last one year of the 2011 census is 2,08,98,228.

According to the latest data available of the Sample Registration System (SRS), the birth rate for 2016 is 20.4 and death rate is 6.4, he said.

The SRS is carried out on a continuous basis in randomly selected villages and urban blocks throughout the country.

Nearly 123 crore Aadhaar cards have been issued to people, Union Minister Hansraj Ahir said in the Rajya Sabha on Wednesday. Replying to a written question, Ahir said as per the 2011 census, the population of India is 121,08,54,977.

Nearly 123 crore Aadhaar cards have been issued to people, Union Minister Hansraj Ahir said in the Rajya Sabha on Wednesday. Replying to a written question, Ahir said as per the 2011 census, the population of India is 121,08,54,977. The UIDAI has issued a total of 122.90 crore Aadhaar cards as on November 30, 2018, he said, adding that 6.71 crore cards were issued to children below five years of age and 29.02 crore cards were given to people in the age group of 5 to 18 years. Ahir said the number of children born within the last one year of the 2011 census is 2,08,98,228. According to the latest data available of the Sample Registration System (SRS), the birth rate for 2016 is 20.4 and death rate is 6.4, he said. The SRS is carried out on a continuous basis in randomly selected villages and urban blocks throughout the country.

123 crore Aadhaar cards issued to people: Government tells Rajya Sabha

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/aadhaar-not-compulsory-with-bank-accounts-mobiles-cabinet-approves-amendments-184906">Aadhaar</a>, India's extraordinary attempt to give every citizen a biometric identity, is set for a massive revamp with new offline verification tools and non-intrusive ways for people seeking to voluntarily use the 12-digit unique number for new bank accounts and mobile connections.

After twists and turns in 2018, led by the landmark Supreme Court ruling on the constitutional validity of <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/ravi-shankar-prasad-to-cscs-will-find-way-out-on-aadhaar-work-issue-179801">Aadhaar</a>, the UIDAI's efforts around offline modes like eAadhaar and QR code that can leverage the unique ID without any access to biometrics or even revealing the 12-digit number would gather pace in 2019.

From school admissions to getting marriage certificates and from paying taxes to taking new mobile connections, Aadhaar touched multiple facets of people's lives as it became the default identifier. This was true for around 1.22 billion Aadhaar holders till doubts emerged that collection of biometric details, even for general service, could infringe on a citizen's privacy rights.

Then, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the world's largest biometric identification database but spelt out its new limitations.

After last year's assertion that Indians have a right to privacy, the apex court in September 2018 redefined the boundaries of the biometric authentication — Aadhaar can be used for payment of government benefits and taxation records but private companies were barred from accessing it.

In a 4-1 judgement delivered by the Constitution Bench, the Supreme Court held that Aadhaar would remain compulsory for the filing of Income Tax (IT) returns and allotment of Permanent Account Number (PAN)

However, Section 57 of the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016 that permitted private entities like telecom companies or other corporates to use the biometric data was struck down, dealing a body blow to the government's ambitions to make the world's largest biometric project mandatory for a slew of services.

The landmark ruling sent banks, telecom operators and fintech companies — who relied heavily on Aadhaar eKYC — scrambling in search of other viable means of customer verification.

As the verdict meant that fulfilling regulatory Know Your Customer (KYC) requirements would have again involved a lot of paperwork for verification purposes, Aadhaar-issuing authority, Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), quickly came up with alternate modes like QR (Quick Response) codes, e-Aadhaar and offline methods.

Just as 2018 started to wind down, came another twist in the plot. Earlier this month, the government decided to propose changes to existing laws - Telegraph Act and PMLA - in order to allow the use of Aadhaar as an ID verification tool for opening bank accounts and obtaining mobile connections, albeit on a voluntary basis. Additionally, fresh penal provisions have been proposed - through an amendment in Aadhaar Act - to deter companies from insisting on Aadhaar or misusing the biometric data.

The proposed amendments, which will be placed before the Parliament during the ongoing Winter session, propose to arm UIDAI with regulator-like powers to take enforcement actions on the misuse of the national biometric ID and impose stiff penalties on violations.

The compelling reason behind this seems to be the government's belief in the transformative potential of Aadhaar — the system is so cheap and efficient that it is estimated to have accounted for over 90 per cent of new subscriptions in the telecom sector, according to experts.

More stringent deterrents are likely to be put in place in the coming months. These might include a penalty for failure to obtain consent for authentication or offline verification — up to three-year imprisonment or fine of up to Rs 10,000 — a penalty for unauthorised use of core biometric information. The latter could attract imprisonment between 3-10 years and a fine of up to Rs 10,000.

Even as it dons regulatory role, the UIDAI would continue to accelerate efforts to transform and scale up Aadhaar enrolment and update services, currently available through 30,000 centres operating in designated bank branches, post offices and government premises across the country. 
'Aadhaar Seva Kendras', similar to the concept of Passport Seva Kendras, will come up in 53 cities across India at an estimated project cost of Rs 300-400 crore. These swanky new centres will be operational by August next year, dishing out appointment-based enrolment, update and other miscellaneous services around Aadhaar, under the watchful eyes of authority's own employees.

Earlier this year, former UIDAI CEO Ajay Bhushan Pandey, recalling his early years as a small-town boy who didn't hold a photo identity for a long time, had reportedly said that Aadhaar offered an answer to an ancient question that was asked by sages — who am I?

The year that was, ensured that the answer continues to be the 12-digit identifier, at least for those who choose to use it.&nbsp;

Aadhaar, India's extraordinary attempt to give every citizen a biometric identity, is set for a massive revamp with new offline verification tools and non-intrusive ways for people seeking to voluntarily use the 12-digit unique number for new bank accounts and mobile connections.

Aadhaar, India's extraordinary attempt to give every citizen a biometric identity, is set for a massive revamp with new offline verification tools and non-intrusive ways for people seeking to voluntarily use the 12-digit unique number for new bank accounts and mobile connections. After twists and turns in 2018, led by the landmark Supreme Court ruling on the constitutional validity of Aadhaar, the UIDAI's efforts around offline modes like eAadhaar and QR code that can leverage the unique ID without any access to biometrics or even revealing the 12-digit number would gather pace in 2019. From school admissions to getting marriage certificates and from paying taxes to taking new mobile connections, Aadhaar touched multiple facets of people's lives as it became the default identifier. This was true for around 1.22 billion Aadhaar holders till doubts emerged that collection of biometric details, even for general service, could infringe on a citizen's privacy rights. Then, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the world's largest biometric identification database but spelt out its new limitations. After last year's assertion that Indians have a right to privacy, the apex court in September 2018 redefined the boundaries of the biometric authentication — Aadhaar can be used for payment of government benefits and taxation records but private companies were barred from accessing it. In a 4-1 judgement delivered by the Constitution Bench, the Supreme Court held that Aadhaar would remain compulsory for the filing of Income Tax (IT) returns and allotment of Permanent Account Number (PAN) However, Section 57 of the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016 that permitted private entities like telecom companies or other corporates to use the biometric data was struck down, dealing a body blow to the government's ambitions to make the world's largest biometric project mandatory for a slew of services. The landmark ruling sent banks, telecom operators and fintech companies — who relied heavily on Aadhaar eKYC — scrambling in search of other viable means of customer verification. As the verdict meant that fulfilling regulatory Know Your Customer (KYC) requirements would have again involved a lot of paperwork for verification purposes, Aadhaar-issuing authority, Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), quickly came up with alternate modes like QR (Quick Response) codes, e-Aadhaar and offline methods. Just as 2018 started to wind down, came another twist in the plot. Earlier this month, the government decided to propose changes to existing laws - Telegraph Act and PMLA - in order to allow the use of Aadhaar as an ID verification tool for opening bank accounts and obtaining mobile connections, albeit on a voluntary basis. Additionally, fresh penal provisions have been proposed - through an amendment in Aadhaar Act - to deter companies from insisting on Aadhaar or misusing the biometric data. The proposed amendments, which will be placed before the Parliament during the ongoing Winter session, propose to arm UIDAI with regulator-like powers to take enforcement actions on the misuse of the national biometric ID and impose stiff penalties on violations. The compelling reason behind this seems to be the government's belief in the transformative potential of Aadhaar — the system is so cheap and efficient that it is estimated to have accounted for over 90 per cent of new subscriptions in the telecom sector, according to experts. More stringent deterrents are likely to be put in place in the coming months. These might include a penalty for failure to obtain consent for authentication or offline verification — up to three-year imprisonment or fine of up to Rs 10,000 — a penalty for unauthorised use of core biometric information. The latter could attract imprisonment between 3-10 years and a fine of up to Rs 10,000. Even as it dons regulatory role, the UIDAI would continue to accelerate efforts to transform and scale up Aadhaar enrolment and update services, currently available through 30,000 centres operating in designated bank branches, post offices and government premises across the country. 'Aadhaar Seva Kendras', similar to the concept of Passport Seva Kendras, will come up in 53 cities across India at an estimated project cost of Rs 300-400 crore. These swanky new centres will be operational by August next year, dishing out appointment-based enrolment, update and other miscellaneous services around Aadhaar, under the watchful eyes of authority's own employees. Earlier this year, former UIDAI CEO Ajay Bhushan Pandey, recalling his early years as a small-town boy who didn't hold a photo identity for a long time, had reportedly said that Aadhaar offered an answer to an ancient question that was asked by sages — who am I? The year that was, ensured that the answer continues to be the 12-digit identifier, at least for those who choose to use it.

Aadhaar: Twists and turns in the biometric tale

Last week, the honourable Supreme Court of India delivered the verdict on Aadhaar. As a sequel to this, all political parties are claiming victory.&nbsp;

Indeed, the two parties which have been at the helm of power in the Centre have been associated with the introduction of this.

Position under UPA - MNIC and Aadhaar

The UPA government had introduced Aadhaar and they gave it teeth through a non-statutory executive order. In the beginning, it was placed under the Planning Commission. Concurrently, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) under P Chidambaram had introduced a Multipurpose National Identity Card (MNIC) project. This was being implemented by the office of Registrar General of India, an attached office under the MHA mandated with the decadal census of the country.

Hence, there was a duplication of efforts. Chidambaram had introduced this project as one of the counter-measures in the aftermath of the 26/11 Mumbai attacks. Hence, capturing the data on citizens was one of the salient concerns of the government. Hence, why were two initiatives which could have been synergised and saved a lot of money to the Exchequer were being introduced and implemented like parallel lines are not known. The government of the day does need to answer this.&nbsp;

Overzealousness in implementing Aadhaar

As a member of the Internal Security team, I had attended a meeting in the Ministry of Information Technology in December 2009. It was a large group from various ministries and regulatory bodies. Basically, the discussion was on the mapping the citizen's identity to trace banking transactions, including money laundering and terror funding which was our mandate.

I had expressed the position on the efficacy of regulation of Western Union, through which money for terror funding was being remitted to their Indian foot soldiers. I, therefore, emphasised on enabling the data-sharing of Aadhaar with the Multi-Agency Centre (MAC) for intelligence gathering on terrorism, which was established with hype by P Chidambaram immediately upon taking over as Home Minister. Although my observations were taken on record as per the minutes of the meeting, little effect was given to these observations. Mr RS Sharma, who was pioneering Aadhaar, appeared too excited with setting up a framework and using it with populist schemes like MNREGA, etc. Lateral spinoffs for securing the nation were last on their minds.

NDA and Aadhaar - Legal teeth

After the swearing in of the new regime in 2014, the government gave Aadhaar legal teeth by reinforcing through legislation. The government's emphasis on government-to-citizen transfer of its citizen intended benefits to close the hitherto pitfalls of syphoning of funds was the overriding priority. These are well captured in the bill. Since this was sought to be an instrument for the transfer of funds from the Consolidated Fund of India, it came under the purview of Money Bill as defined in the Article 110 of the Indian Constitution. Hence, they brought the bill as a money bill, which has been upheld by the Supreme Court of India.

Enabling interagency sharing of data with safeguards 
 
But the issue of sharing of this for intelligence gathering and internal security purposes were sidelined. Although enabling provisions which were incorporated in the Act have been set aside, the government did not make it fail safe itself to sustain the judicial scrutiny. A more comprehensive provision of Sector 57 with adequate safeguards against misuse for purposes other than security or state agenda should have been there. Maybe that would have saved this section in a judicial scrutiny.

Money bill upheld

But what is more salient is the content of the petition itself. In the averments of the petitioner challenged the introduction of the bill as a money bill, then their agitating on the issue of privacy was not sustainable. The government in power does have the mandate and power to bring in instrumentalities to implement its citizen-centric schemes and collect data relating the beneficiary for this purpose and cross-sharing of such data with different agencies of the state. There was no issue of privacy involved in this. 
 
Hence their agitating the issue of privacy again, I believe, was unfounded. Hence the money bill character of Aadhaar was sure to be upheld because by virtue of its objects -&nbsp;it was to establish an instrument of beneficent delivery by the state.

Securing the nation sidestepped

Having said that notwithstanding this, the latent impact of this is that now there will be restrictions of cross-sharing of data even among different state agencies suo moto and covertly. This gets hit. Now attendant rules will be framed to enable a prior permission from the Aadhaar holder, akin to the RTI Act. Let us appreciate that this may adversely affect any initiative regarding suspicious transactions, laundering of money, holding proceeds of crime and terror and terror funding. 
 
The agencies may be constrained. Or such information, even if shared, cannot be arraigned as evidence in criminal prosecutions, unless a prior permission provision is brought out in the rules and the accused citizen accords permission. There also, this permission, if enabled by the government, will again be under scrutiny under the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) in case it is used in a trial.&nbsp;

This impairing of a criminal investigation, I am sure, was not the agenda hidden under the privacy argument. The petitioner will have to answer this.

(This article was originally published on Zee News. Read the <a href="http://zeenews.india.com/blogs/overzealous-aadhaar-implementation-a-lost-national-security-opportunity-2144895.html">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

&nbsp;

Last week, the honourable Supreme Court of India delivered the verdict on Aadhaar. As a sequel to this, all political parties are claiming victory. Indeed, the two parties which have been at the helm of power in the Centre have been associated with the introduction of this.

Last week, the honourable Supreme Court of India delivered the verdict on Aadhaar. As a sequel to this, all political parties are claiming victory. Indeed, the two parties which have been at the helm of power in the Centre have been associated with the introduction of this. Position under UPA - MNIC and Aadhaar The UPA government had introduced Aadhaar and they gave it teeth through a non-statutory executive order. In the beginning, it was placed under the Planning Commission. Concurrently, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) under P Chidambaram had introduced a Multipurpose National Identity Card (MNIC) project. This was being implemented by the office of Registrar General of India, an attached office under the MHA mandated with the decadal census of the country. Hence, there was a duplication of efforts. Chidambaram had introduced this project as one of the counter-measures in the aftermath of the 26/11 Mumbai attacks. Hence, capturing the data on citizens was one of the salient concerns of the government. Hence, why were two initiatives which could have been synergised and saved a lot of money to the Exchequer were being introduced and implemented like parallel lines are not known. The government of the day does need to answer this. Overzealousness in implementing Aadhaar As a member of the Internal Security team, I had attended a meeting in the Ministry of Information Technology in December 2009. It was a large group from various ministries and regulatory bodies. Basically, the discussion was on the mapping the citizen's identity to trace banking transactions, including money laundering and terror funding which was our mandate. I had expressed the position on the efficacy of regulation of Western Union, through which money for terror funding was being remitted to their Indian foot soldiers. I, therefore, emphasised on enabling the data-sharing of Aadhaar with the Multi-Agency Centre (MAC) for intelligence gathering on terrorism, which was established with hype by P Chidambaram immediately upon taking over as Home Minister. Although my observations were taken on record as per the minutes of the meeting, little effect was given to these observations. Mr RS Sharma, who was pioneering Aadhaar, appeared too excited with setting up a framework and using it with populist schemes like MNREGA, etc. Lateral spinoffs for securing the nation were last on their minds. NDA and Aadhaar - Legal teeth After the swearing in of the new regime in 2014, the government gave Aadhaar legal teeth by reinforcing through legislation. The government's emphasis on government-to-citizen transfer of its citizen intended benefits to close the hitherto pitfalls of syphoning of funds was the overriding priority. These are well captured in the bill. Since this was sought to be an instrument for the transfer of funds from the Consolidated Fund of India, it came under the purview of Money Bill as defined in the Article 110 of the Indian Constitution. Hence, they brought the bill as a money bill, which has been upheld by the Supreme Court of India. Enabling interagency sharing of data with safeguards But the issue of sharing of this for intelligence gathering and internal security purposes were sidelined. Although enabling provisions which were incorporated in the Act have been set aside, the government did not make it fail safe itself to sustain the judicial scrutiny. A more comprehensive provision of Sector 57 with adequate safeguards against misuse for purposes other than security or state agenda should have been there. Maybe that would have saved this section in a judicial scrutiny. Money bill upheld But what is more salient is the content of the petition itself. In the averments of the petitioner challenged the introduction of the bill as a money bill, then their agitating on the issue of privacy was not sustainable. The government in power does have the mandate and power to bring in instrumentalities to implement its citizen-centric schemes and collect data relating the beneficiary for this purpose and cross-sharing of such data with different agencies of the state. There was no issue of privacy involved in this. Hence their agitating the issue of privacy again, I believe, was unfounded. Hence the money bill character of Aadhaar was sure to be upheld because by virtue of its objects - it was to establish an instrument of beneficent delivery by the state. Securing the nation sidestepped Having said that notwithstanding this, the latent impact of this is that now there will be restrictions of cross-sharing of data even among different state agencies suo moto and covertly. This gets hit. Now attendant rules will be framed to enable a prior permission from the Aadhaar holder, akin to the RTI Act. Let us appreciate that this may adversely affect any initiative regarding suspicious transactions, laundering of money, holding proceeds of crime and terror and terror funding. The agencies may be constrained. Or such information, even if shared, cannot be arraigned as evidence in criminal prosecutions, unless a prior permission provision is brought out in the rules and the accused citizen accords permission. There also, this permission, if enabled by the government, will again be under scrutiny under the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) in case it is used in a trial. This impairing of a criminal investigation, I am sure, was not the agenda hidden under the privacy argument. The petitioner will have to answer this. (This article was originally published on Zee News. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Overzealous Aadhaar implementation a lost national security opportunity

In its verdict on the constitutionality of the Unique Identification Number Aadhaar, the Supreme Court pronounced today, "Aadhaar cannot be insisted upon in schools and private companies."

"CBSE, UGC and NEET making Aadhaar making mandatory are bad," said Supreme Court.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/supreme-court-upholds-validity-aadhaar-says-cant-be-insisted-education-and-banking">The verdict</a> brought relief to customers making Aadhaar not mandatory for buying cellular connections and SIM cards. Bank account holders will no longer be required to link the 12-digit identification number to their accounts.

"No mobile company can demand Aadhaar card," the top court ruled on Wednesday.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
No mobile company can demand "Aadhaar card": Supreme Court <a href="https://t.co/IRAm5pOUee">pic.twitter.com/IRAm5pOUee</a>
— ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1044829880200908800?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 26, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

However, it will still be compulsory to link the Permanent account number (PAN) to Aadhaar and for filing IT returns. &nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Aadhaar card is mandatory for PAN linking: Supreme Court <a href="https://t.co/cBiKwJbdjX">pic.twitter.com/cBiKwJbdjX</a>
— ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1044830700376084480?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 26, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The top court called Aadhaar different from other ID proofs adding that there are sufficient safeguards in Aadhaar's structure.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Supreme Court strikes down the section 57 of Aadhaar Act; as a result, private companies cannot ask for Aadhaar card <a href="https://t.co/sg9HMax86L">pic.twitter.com/sg9HMax86L</a>
— ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1044833022640558081?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 26, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

"There is a fundamental difference between Aadhaar and other identity proof as Aadhaar cannot be duplicated and it is a unique identification," said Supreme Court.

"The unique identification proof also empowers and gives identity to marginalised sections of the society The unique identification proof also empowers and gives identity to marginalised sections of the society," the Apex court said.

In its verdict on the constitutionality of the Unique Identification Number Aadhaar, the Supreme Court pronounced today, "Aadhaar cannot be insisted upon in schools and private companies.

In its verdict on the constitutionality of the Unique Identification Number Aadhaar, the Supreme Court pronounced today, "Aadhaar cannot be insisted upon in schools and private companies." "CBSE, UGC and NEET making Aadhaar making mandatory are bad," said Supreme Court. The verdict brought relief to customers making Aadhaar not mandatory for buying cellular connections and SIM cards. Bank account holders will no longer be required to link the 12-digit identification number to their accounts. "No mobile company can demand Aadhaar card," the top court ruled on Wednesday. No mobile company can demand "Aadhaar card": Supreme Court pic.twitter.com/IRAm5pOUee — ANI (@ANI) September 26, 2018 × However, it will still be compulsory to link the Permanent account number (PAN) to Aadhaar and for filing IT returns. Aadhaar card is mandatory for PAN linking: Supreme Court pic.twitter.com/cBiKwJbdjX — ANI (@ANI) September 26, 2018 × The top court called Aadhaar different from other ID proofs adding that there are sufficient safeguards in Aadhaar's structure. Supreme Court strikes down the section 57 of Aadhaar Act; as a result, private companies cannot ask for Aadhaar card pic.twitter.com/sg9HMax86L — ANI (@ANI) September 26, 2018 × "There is a fundamental difference between Aadhaar and other identity proof as Aadhaar cannot be duplicated and it is a unique identification," said Supreme Court. "The unique identification proof also empowers and gives identity to marginalised sections of the society The unique identification proof also empowers and gives identity to marginalised sections of the society," the Apex court said.

Aadhaar not mandatory for mobile phone connections, bank accounts: Supreme Court 

The following is the chronology of events leading up to the Supreme Court on Wednesday declaring the Centre's flagship Aadhaar scheme as constitutionally valid although it struck down some provisions including the linking of the biometric ID with bank accounts, mobile phones and school admissions:

* January 2009: Planning Commission notification on UIDAI.

* 2010-2011: National Identification Authority of India Bill, 2010 introduced.

* November&nbsp;2012: Retired Justice K S Puttaswamy and others file PILs in SC challenging validity of Aadhaar.

* November 2013: Supreme Court orders all states and Union Territories be impleaded as respondents.

* March 3, 2016: Aadhaar Bill, 2016 introduced in Lok Sabha; later passed as Money Bill.

* May 2017: Former Union minister and Congress leader Jairam Ramesh moves SC challenging the Centre's decision to treat Aadhaar bill as a money bill.

* August 24, 2017: Supreme Court nine-judge bench rules that right to privacy is a fundamental right.

* December 15: Supreme Court extends deadline for mandatory linking of Aadhaar with various services and welfare schemes till March 31, 2018.

* January 17, 2018: Supreme Court five-judge bench begins hearing Aadhaar case.

* January 25: Supreme Court asks Chhattisgarh HC to modify in 10 days its order directing all trial courts in the state to mandatorily accept copies of Aadhaar card for releasing an accused on bail.

* February 19: Delhi BJP leader Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay seeks direction to EC to take appropriate steps to implement an 'Aadhaar based election voting system'.

* February 21: Supreme Court says the alleged defect that citizens' biometric details under the Aadhaar scheme were being collected without any law, could be cured by subsequently bringing a statute.

* March 7: Supreme Court says Aadhaar number not mandatory for enrolment of students in all India exams.

* March 13: SC extends March 31 deadline of Aadhaar linking till it gives its order.

* March 22: UIDAI CEO says breaking the Aadhaar encryption may take "more than the age of the universe for the fastest computer on earth".

* March&nbsp;28: Social activist Reshma Prasad seeks direction to the Centre to create a separate third gender category option on PAN cards for transgenders.

* April 3: Centre tells SC Aadhaar law is just, fair &amp; reasonable.

* April 17: Supreme Court raises concerns that there is a threat of Aadhaar data misuse.

* April 25: Supreme Court questions Centre on mandatory seeding of Aadhaar with mobile.

* May 10: Supreme Court reserves verdict.

* September 26: SC upholds constitutional validity of Aadhaar but strikes down certain provisions 
Including its linking with bank accounts, mobile phones and school admissions.&nbsp;

The following is the chronology of events leading up to the Supreme Court on Wednesday declaring the Centre's flagship Aadhaar scheme as constitutionally valid although it struck down some provisions including the linking of the biometric ID with bank accounts, mobile phones and school admissions: * January 2009: Planning Commission notification on UIDAI.

The following is the chronology of events leading up to the Supreme Court on Wednesday declaring the Centre's flagship Aadhaar scheme as constitutionally valid although it struck down some provisions including the linking of the biometric ID with bank accounts, mobile phones and school admissions: * January 2009: Planning Commission notification on UIDAI. * 2010-2011: National Identification Authority of India Bill, 2010 introduced. * November 2012: Retired Justice K S Puttaswamy and others file PILs in SC challenging validity of Aadhaar. * November 2013: Supreme Court orders all states and Union Territories be impleaded as respondents. * March 3, 2016: Aadhaar Bill, 2016 introduced in Lok Sabha; later passed as Money Bill. * May 2017: Former Union minister and Congress leader Jairam Ramesh moves SC challenging the Centre's decision to treat Aadhaar bill as a money bill. * August 24, 2017: Supreme Court nine-judge bench rules that right to privacy is a fundamental right. * December 15: Supreme Court extends deadline for mandatory linking of Aadhaar with various services and welfare schemes till March 31, 2018. * January 17, 2018: Supreme Court five-judge bench begins hearing Aadhaar case. * January 25: Supreme Court asks Chhattisgarh HC to modify in 10 days its order directing all trial courts in the state to mandatorily accept copies of Aadhaar card for releasing an accused on bail. * February 19: Delhi BJP leader Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay seeks direction to EC to take appropriate steps to implement an 'Aadhaar based election voting system'. * February 21: Supreme Court says the alleged defect that citizens' biometric details under the Aadhaar scheme were being collected without any law, could be cured by subsequently bringing a statute. * March 7: Supreme Court says Aadhaar number not mandatory for enrolment of students in all India exams. * March 13: SC extends March 31 deadline of Aadhaar linking till it gives its order. * March 22: UIDAI CEO says breaking the Aadhaar encryption may take "more than the age of the universe for the fastest computer on earth". * March 28: Social activist Reshma Prasad seeks direction to the Centre to create a separate third gender category option on PAN cards for transgenders. * April 3: Centre tells SC Aadhaar law is just, fair & reasonable. * April 17: Supreme Court raises concerns that there is a threat of Aadhaar data misuse. * April 25: Supreme Court questions Centre on mandatory seeding of Aadhaar with mobile. * May 10: Supreme Court reserves verdict. * September 26: SC upholds constitutional validity of Aadhaar but strikes down certain provisions Including its linking with bank accounts, mobile phones and school admissions.

Aadhaar judgement: The timeline of Aadhaar case

The UIDAI Wednesday termed the Supreme Court judgement, which upheld Aadhaar as a constitutionally valid scheme, as a victory.

The Unique Identification Authority of India CEO Ajay Bhushan Pandey told&nbsp;that the 4:1 apex court judgement announced Wednesday is in favour of Aadhaar.

"It is 4:1 judgement in favour of Aadhaar. The court has declared Aadhaar constitutionally valid. It is a money bill. It can be used for pan card. It empowers poor and marginalised section. Aadhaar can be used for subsidies and government schemes so that there is no leakage of government funds. It can be used for income tax so that tax evasion and black money can be curbed," Pandey said.

The Supreme Court Wednesday declared the Centre's flagship Aadhaar scheme as Constitutionally valid. The apex court's five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra said Aadhaar is meant to help benefits reach the marginalised sections of the society and takes into account the dignity of people not only from personal but also from community point of view.

Justice Sikri struck down Section 57 of Aadhaar Act permitting private entities to avail Aadhaar data and ruled that Aadhaar authentication data cannot be stored for more than six months.

Reacting to the court order of annulling section 57, Pandey said: "The court has restricted private usage (of Aadhaar) without any backing of Law. Same has been suggested by Justice Shrikrishna Committee".

The top court said Aadhaar is serving much bigger public interest and Aadhaar means unique and it is better to be unique than being best. There are three sets of judgements being pronounced on the issue.

The first of the three verdicts was pronounced by Justice A K Sikri, who wrote the judgement himself, CJI and Justice A M Khanwilkar. Justice Sikri said robust data protection regime has to be brought in place as early as possible.

The Supreme Court added that CBSE, NEET, UGC cannot make Aadhaar mandatory and it is not compulsory for school admissions. The apex court also said the linking of Aadhaar for opening of bank accounts and for mobile connections is not mandatory.

Cyber Security expert and Indian Infosec Consortium CEO Jiten Jain said that the custodians and interpreters of constitution have delivered a wonderful judgement on Aadhaar, which has taken into account privacy concerns of all stakeholder specially citizens.

"I am happy that Aadhar Act has been upheld and private sector entities have been virtually barred from collecting or linking Aadhar to any services they provide. (The) Supreme court has made it clear that governments can use Aadhaar to serve society but cannot use it to become dangerous master," Jain said.&nbsp;

The UIDAI Wednesday termed the Supreme Court judgement, which upheld Aadhaar as a constitutionally valid scheme, as a victory. The Unique Identification Authority of India CEO Ajay Bhushan Pandey told that the 4:1 apex court judgement announced Wednesday is in favour of Aadhaar.

The UIDAI Wednesday termed the Supreme Court judgement, which upheld Aadhaar as a constitutionally valid scheme, as a victory. The Unique Identification Authority of India CEO Ajay Bhushan Pandey told that the 4:1 apex court judgement announced Wednesday is in favour of Aadhaar. "It is 4:1 judgement in favour of Aadhaar. The court has declared Aadhaar constitutionally valid. It is a money bill. It can be used for pan card. It empowers poor and marginalised section. Aadhaar can be used for subsidies and government schemes so that there is no leakage of government funds. It can be used for income tax so that tax evasion and black money can be curbed," Pandey said. The Supreme Court Wednesday declared the Centre's flagship Aadhaar scheme as Constitutionally valid. The apex court's five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra said Aadhaar is meant to help benefits reach the marginalised sections of the society and takes into account the dignity of people not only from personal but also from community point of view. Justice Sikri struck down Section 57 of Aadhaar Act permitting private entities to avail Aadhaar data and ruled that Aadhaar authentication data cannot be stored for more than six months. Reacting to the court order of annulling section 57, Pandey said: "The court has restricted private usage (of Aadhaar) without any backing of Law. Same has been suggested by Justice Shrikrishna Committee". The top court said Aadhaar is serving much bigger public interest and Aadhaar means unique and it is better to be unique than being best. There are three sets of judgements being pronounced on the issue. The first of the three verdicts was pronounced by Justice A K Sikri, who wrote the judgement himself, CJI and Justice A M Khanwilkar. Justice Sikri said robust data protection regime has to be brought in place as early as possible. The Supreme Court added that CBSE, NEET, UGC cannot make Aadhaar mandatory and it is not compulsory for school admissions. The apex court also said the linking of Aadhaar for opening of bank accounts and for mobile connections is not mandatory. Cyber Security expert and Indian Infosec Consortium CEO Jiten Jain said that the custodians and interpreters of constitution have delivered a wonderful judgement on Aadhaar, which has taken into account privacy concerns of all stakeholder specially citizens. "I am happy that Aadhar Act has been upheld and private sector entities have been virtually barred from collecting or linking Aadhar to any services they provide. (The) Supreme court has made it clear that governments can use Aadhaar to serve society but cannot use it to become dangerous master," Jain said.

Aadhaar verdict: UIDAI sees victory in Supreme Court judgement, says private usage restricted

The <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/supreme-court-upholds-validity-aadhaar-says-cant-be-insisted-education-and-banking">Aadhaar Act</a> could not have been passed as Money Bill as it amounts to a fraud on the Constitution and is liable to be struck down, Supreme Court Justice D Y Chandrachud said Wednesday.

Justice Chandrachud, who was part of the five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra, wrote a separate judgement saying he had expressed some views different from that of the verdict pronounced by Justice A K Sikri.

Bypassing the Rajya Sabha to pass the<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/complete-list-services-exempted-aadhaar-supreme-court-directive-167758"> Aadhaar Act</a> amounted to subterfuge and the law was liable to be struck down as being violative of Article 110 of the Constitution, he ruled.

Article 110 has specific grounds for Money Bill and the Aadhaar law went beyond this, Justice Chandrachud said, adding that in the current form, the Act cannot be held to be constitutional.

He observed that the enactment of the Act does not save the Centre's Aadhaar scheme.

Noting that mobile phone has become an important feature of life and its seeding with Aadhaar posed a grave threat to privacy, liberty, autonomy, he favoured deletion of consumers' Aadhaar data by the mobile service providers.

Maintaining that the Prevention of Money Laundering Act Rules proceeded on assumption that every bank account holder is a money launderer, he said the assumption that every individual who opens a bank account is a potential terrorist or a launderer is "draconian", he said.

Justice Chandrachud also said collection of data may lead to individual profiling of citizens.

He said the Aadhaar programme violated informational privacy, self-determination and data protection. It has been admitted by UIDAI that it stores vital data which is violative of right to privacy, he added.

This data was vulnerable to be misused by third party and private vendors, and that too, without the consent of an individual, Justice Chandrachud maintained and said the Aadhaar project has failed to remedy the flaws in its design, leading to exclusion.

Allowing private players to use Aadhaar will lead to profiling, which could be used to ascertain the political views of citizens, the judge, who pronounced his separate verdict, said.

He also held that denial of social welfare measures was violation of fundamental rights of citizens.

There is no institutional responsibility of the UIDAI to protect the data of citizens, he said, adding that there was absence of a regulatory mechanism to provide robust data protection.

However, he said it was now impossible to live in India without Aadhaar but it was violative of Article 14.

If Aadhaar is seeded with every database, then there is chance of infringement of right to privacy, he said.

Justice Chandrachud said while Parliament possesses the right to make a law, the absence of protection leads to violation of various rights.

The Aadhaar Act could not have been passed as Money Bill as it amounts to a fraud on the Constitution and is liable to be struck down, Supreme Court Justice D Y Chandrachud said Wednesday.

The Aadhaar Act could not have been passed as Money Bill as it amounts to a fraud on the Constitution and is liable to be struck down, Supreme Court Justice D Y Chandrachud said Wednesday. Justice Chandrachud, who was part of the five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra, wrote a separate judgement saying he had expressed some views different from that of the verdict pronounced by Justice A K Sikri. Bypassing the Rajya Sabha to pass the Aadhaar Act amounted to subterfuge and the law was liable to be struck down as being violative of Article 110 of the Constitution, he ruled. Article 110 has specific grounds for Money Bill and the Aadhaar law went beyond this, Justice Chandrachud said, adding that in the current form, the Act cannot be held to be constitutional. He observed that the enactment of the Act does not save the Centre's Aadhaar scheme. Noting that mobile phone has become an important feature of life and its seeding with Aadhaar posed a grave threat to privacy, liberty, autonomy, he favoured deletion of consumers' Aadhaar data by the mobile service providers. Maintaining that the Prevention of Money Laundering Act Rules proceeded on assumption that every bank account holder is a money launderer, he said the assumption that every individual who opens a bank account is a potential terrorist or a launderer is "draconian", he said. Justice Chandrachud also said collection of data may lead to individual profiling of citizens. He said the Aadhaar programme violated informational privacy, self-determination and data protection. It has been admitted by UIDAI that it stores vital data which is violative of right to privacy, he added. This data was vulnerable to be misused by third party and private vendors, and that too, without the consent of an individual, Justice Chandrachud maintained and said the Aadhaar project has failed to remedy the flaws in its design, leading to exclusion. Allowing private players to use Aadhaar will lead to profiling, which could be used to ascertain the political views of citizens, the judge, who pronounced his separate verdict, said. He also held that denial of social welfare measures was violation of fundamental rights of citizens. There is no institutional responsibility of the UIDAI to protect the data of citizens, he said, adding that there was absence of a regulatory mechanism to provide robust data protection. However, he said it was now impossible to live in India without Aadhaar but it was violative of Article 14. If Aadhaar is seeded with every database, then there is chance of infringement of right to privacy, he said. Justice Chandrachud said while Parliament possesses the right to make a law, the absence of protection leads to violation of various rights.

Aadhaar law couldn't have been passed as Money Bill, amounts to fraud on Constitution: Justice Chandrachud

The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/supreme-court-upholds-validity-aadhaar-says-cant-be-insisted-education-and-banking">upheld the constitutionality of the Aadhaar scheme</a>. The top court, in its verdict today, stated that "Aadhaar cannot be insisted upon in schools and private companies. CBSE, UGC and NEET making Adhaar making mandatory are bad," the ruling noted.&nbsp;

The verdict also rendered the unique identification number not mandatory for new mobile connections and banking services, however, it will still be required for Personal Account Number (PAN) and for filing ITR.&nbsp;

Here's a complete list of services which will no longer require a citizen to produce Aadhaar details:

<ul>
	<li>School admissions</li>
	<li>Opening bank accounts</li>
	<li>Mobile connections</li>
	<li>CBSE, NEET and UGC exams</li>
</ul>

A five-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra held that while Aadhaar would remain mandatory for the filing of IT returns and allotment of Permanent Account Number (PAN), it would not be mandatory to link Aadhaar to bank accounts and telecom service providers cannot seek its linking of Aadhaar for mobile connections.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Aadhaar?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Aadhaar</a> verdict: Aadhaar mandatory for PAN linking; not compulsory for UGC, NEET &amp; CBSE exams &amp; school admissions. Aadhaar not needed for opening a bank a/c, no mobile company can demand Aadhaar, private companies can't seek Aadhaar data <a href="https://t.co/pNkkfthB6d">pic.twitter.com/pNkkfthB6d</a>
— ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1044838112394956800?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 26, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

It would also not be mandatory for school admissions, as also for the examinations conducted by the Central Board of Secondary Examination, National Eligibility cum Entrance Test for medical entrance and the University Grants Commission.

Justice AK Sikri read out the majority judgment in the case. Justice Sikri started his Aadhaar judgment by saying, "It is better to be unique than the best." &nbsp;He further added that Aadhaar has become the most talked about expression in the recent years.

Justice Sikri said that "the Judgment also deals with Proportionality doctrine, compelling State interest and Strict Scrutiny Test." Talking about the judgment, Justice Sikri said that the concept of Human dignity has been enlarged in it.

Justice Chandrachud&nbsp;said that the Aadhaar project, "failed to remedy the flaws in its design and has led to exclusion."

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Supreme Court on Aadhaar matter: Justice Chandrachud says, "Aadhaar violates the right to privacy as it could possibly lead to profiling of persons and voters" <a href="https://t.co/JLHZkeguRj">pic.twitter.com/JLHZkeguRj</a>
— ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1044837655127760897?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 26, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

There is no institutional responsibility of UIDAI to protect data of citizens, said Justice Chandrachud.

"Data vulnerable to misuse by any third party, private vendors, that too without the consent of an individual," he added.&nbsp;

The bench also struck down the national security exception under the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act.

(With inputs from PTI)&nbsp;

The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday upheld the constitutionality of the Aadhaar scheme. The top court, in its verdict today, stated that "Aadhaar cannot be insisted upon in schools and private companies.

The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday upheld the constitutionality of the Aadhaar scheme. The top court, in its verdict today, stated that "Aadhaar cannot be insisted upon in schools and private companies. CBSE, UGC and NEET making Adhaar making mandatory are bad," the ruling noted. The verdict also rendered the unique identification number not mandatory for new mobile connections and banking services, however, it will still be required for Personal Account Number (PAN) and for filing ITR. Here's a complete list of services which will no longer require a citizen to produce Aadhaar details: School admissions Opening bank accounts Mobile connections CBSE, NEET and UGC exams A five-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra held that while Aadhaar would remain mandatory for the filing of IT returns and allotment of Permanent Account Number (PAN), it would not be mandatory to link Aadhaar to bank accounts and telecom service providers cannot seek its linking of Aadhaar for mobile connections. #Aadhaar verdict: Aadhaar mandatory for PAN linking; not compulsory for UGC, NEET & CBSE exams & school admissions. Aadhaar not needed for opening a bank a/c, no mobile company can demand Aadhaar, private companies can't seek Aadhaar data pic.twitter.com/pNkkfthB6d — ANI (@ANI) September 26, 2018 × It would also not be mandatory for school admissions, as also for the examinations conducted by the Central Board of Secondary Examination, National Eligibility cum Entrance Test for medical entrance and the University Grants Commission. Justice AK Sikri read out the majority judgment in the case. Justice Sikri started his Aadhaar judgment by saying, "It is better to be unique than the best." He further added that Aadhaar has become the most talked about expression in the recent years. Justice Sikri said that "the Judgment also deals with Proportionality doctrine, compelling State interest and Strict Scrutiny Test." Talking about the judgment, Justice Sikri said that the concept of Human dignity has been enlarged in it. Justice Chandrachud said that the Aadhaar project, "failed to remedy the flaws in its design and has led to exclusion." Supreme Court on Aadhaar matter: Justice Chandrachud says, "Aadhaar violates the right to privacy as it could possibly lead to profiling of persons and voters" pic.twitter.com/JLHZkeguRj — ANI (@ANI) September 26, 2018 × There is no institutional responsibility of UIDAI to protect data of citizens, said Justice Chandrachud. "Data vulnerable to misuse by any third party, private vendors, that too without the consent of an individual," he added. The bench also struck down the national security exception under the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act. (With inputs from PTI)

Complete list of services exempted from Aadhaar as per Supreme Court directive 

UIDAI's counsel, Rakesh Dwivedi's recent statements state that a large amount of sensitive, personal data was being collected by foreign companies but they were not able to breach the Aadhaar database.&nbsp;

Dwivedi, on April 17, had thrown an open challenge to the petitioners to hack his personal data via the Aadhaar database. He also communicated that the data stored in the Aadhaar database was absolutely secure and cannot be manipulated using the internet.&nbsp;

The senior counsel, on Wednesday, informed the Supreme Court about an anonymous person taking up the challenge to elicit his personal details using a website. Dwivedi informed having received a two-pager document with personal details of him and his family members.

He noted that the list of information did not contain any information linked to him or his family members' Aadhaar database.&nbsp;

Dwivedi explained that the list of his personal details as well as information collection about his family members was purely collated with the help Google and data available in the public domain. He went on to state that the Aadhaar database is not connected to the internet which makes it difficult to process, analyse, hack, or manipulate.&nbsp;

Aadhaar database is immune to unscrupulous activities, it cannot be used for surveillance or for commercial exploitation. Dwivedi argued.&nbsp;

The apex court, in its interim order, had said Aadhaar will not be required for availing various services like mobile and banking till it decides the petitions challenging the scheme.

Earlier, Dwivedi was labouring on the point that Aadhaar authentication was not required for every transaction and the fear of aggregation and collation of metadata was unfounded.

"For example, in case of PAN cards, it is once in a lifetime. For the sims, it is done only at the time of obtaining it. So, where is this multiplication of authentication from morning till evening coming from," Dwivedi said, adding, "realistically speaking, there is no trail of authentication from morning to evening. No real-time tracking is done" 
&nbsp;

Dwivedi, on April 17, had thrown an open challenge to the petitioners to hack his personal data via the Aadhaar database

UIDAI's counsel, Rakesh Dwivedi's recent statements state that a large amount of sensitive, personal data was being collected by foreign companies but they were not able to breach the Aadhaar database. Dwivedi, on April 17, had thrown an open challenge to the petitioners to hack his personal data via the Aadhaar database. He also communicated that the data stored in the Aadhaar database was absolutely secure and cannot be manipulated using the internet. The senior counsel, on Wednesday, informed the Supreme Court about an anonymous person taking up the challenge to elicit his personal details using a website. Dwivedi informed having received a two-pager document with personal details of him and his family members. He noted that the list of information did not contain any information linked to him or his family members' Aadhaar database. Dwivedi explained that the list of his personal details as well as information collection about his family members was purely collated with the help Google and data available in the public domain. He went on to state that the Aadhaar database is not connected to the internet which makes it difficult to process, analyse, hack, or manipulate. Aadhaar database is immune to unscrupulous activities, it cannot be used for surveillance or for commercial exploitation. Dwivedi argued. The apex court, in its interim order, had said Aadhaar will not be required for availing various services like mobile and banking till it decides the petitions challenging the scheme. Earlier, Dwivedi was labouring on the point that Aadhaar authentication was not required for every transaction and the fear of aggregation and collation of metadata was unfounded. "For example, in case of PAN cards, it is once in a lifetime. For the sims, it is done only at the time of obtaining it. So, where is this multiplication of authentication from morning till evening coming from," Dwivedi said, adding, "realistically speaking, there is no trail of authentication from morning to evening. No real-time tracking is done"

Stranger got personal info but not Aadhaar details of me, wife, children: UIDAI counsel

The Supreme Court yesterday said it was not sure whether bringing people "face to face" with authorities through Aadhaar was the best model as the State should reach them to accord the benefits of the welfare schemes.

A five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra, hearing a clutch of petitions challenging Aadhaar and its enabling 2016 law, was told by the counsel for the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) that the 12 digit national identifier brought the citizens face to face with the service providers for getting the benefits.

"We are not sure if that is the best model. The individual should not be a supplicant. The State should go to him and give him benefits," the bench, also comprising Justices A K Sikri, A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud and Ashok Bhushan, said.&nbsp

The bench observed that the UIDAI says Aadhaar is a means for identification, but the "only caveat to that is that there should be no exclusion".

Senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for UIDAI and the Gujarat government, said the development was necessary to ensure that people are freed from poverty.

Liberating people from poverty is at one end of the spectrum and the right to privacy is on the other, the bench observed.

The UIDAI referred to social ills like manual scavenging and prostitution and said that despite laws, these evils were rampant in the society and the apex court should strike a balance while dealing with the competing fundamental rights of citizens.

Referring to apex court judgements, the senior lawyer said it has been held that to save the freedom of speech and expression, the right to reputation of a citizen under Article 21 cannot be crucified.

The apex court, besides being the protector of fundamental rights, is also a "balancing wheel" to ensure that competing fundamentals co-exist.

Mr Dwivedi then referred to a verdict by which an HIV positive rape victim was denied the permission to abort the foetus after a doctors' panel gave the report that it could be fatal for the woman.

"The court balanced the rights in the case where fundamental right to life was involved," he said, adding that in the present matter, the issue merely pertained to identification.

"What is being done under section 7 of the Aadhaar Act covers human rights of a lot of people of our country. This court should act as a sentinel to ensure that right to privacy is balanced with all the other rights under Article 21 that Aadhaar covers," Mr Dwivedi said.

The counsel for Mr Dwivedi would resume his submissions on April 24.&nbsp

Earlier, the bench had said that if biometric authentication is attached to every transaction entered into by a person, it would "form a wealth of information" necessitating the need for data protection.

The bench observed that the UIDAI says Aadhaar is a means for identification, but the "only caveat to that is that there should be no exclusion".

The Supreme Court yesterday said it was not sure whether bringing people "face to face" with authorities through Aadhaar was the best model as the State should reach them to accord the benefits of the welfare schemes. A five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra, hearing a clutch of petitions challenging Aadhaar and its enabling 2016 law, was told by the counsel for the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) that the 12 digit national identifier brought the citizens face to face with the service providers for getting the benefits. "We are not sure if that is the best model. The individual should not be a supplicant. The State should go to him and give him benefits," the bench, also comprising Justices A K Sikri, A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud and Ashok Bhushan, said. The bench observed that the UIDAI says Aadhaar is a means for identification, but the "only caveat to that is that there should be no exclusion". Senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for UIDAI and the Gujarat government, said the development was necessary to ensure that people are freed from poverty. Liberating people from poverty is at one end of the spectrum and the right to privacy is on the other, the bench observed. The UIDAI referred to social ills like manual scavenging and prostitution and said that despite laws, these evils were rampant in the society and the apex court should strike a balance while dealing with the competing fundamental rights of citizens. Referring to apex court judgements, the senior lawyer said it has been held that to save the freedom of speech and expression, the right to reputation of a citizen under Article 21 cannot be crucified. The apex court, besides being the protector of fundamental rights, is also a "balancing wheel" to ensure that competing fundamentals co-exist. Mr Dwivedi then referred to a verdict by which an HIV positive rape victim was denied the permission to abort the foetus after a doctors' panel gave the report that it could be fatal for the woman. "The court balanced the rights in the case where fundamental right to life was involved," he said, adding that in the present matter, the issue merely pertained to identification. "What is being done under section 7 of the Aadhaar Act covers human rights of a lot of people of our country. This court should act as a sentinel to ensure that right to privacy is balanced with all the other rights under Article 21 that Aadhaar covers," Mr Dwivedi said. The counsel for Mr Dwivedi would resume his submissions on April 24. Earlier, the bench had said that if biometric authentication is attached to every transaction entered into by a person, it would "form a wealth of information" necessitating the need for data protection.

Not sure if Aadhaar is best model to accord benefits: Supreme Court

The Unique Identification Authority of India has made the startling claim that Google and smart card companies do not want the Aadhaar programme to succeed.&nbsp

The claim was made before the Supreme Court on Tuesday.&nbsp

News reports quoted Rakesh Dwivedi, the counsel appearing for the UIDAI, as saying that a campaign had been unelashed against Aadhaar.

Dwivedi told the Supreme Court that if the Aadhaar programme were to succeed —&nbsp should it turn into a foolproof way to authenticate someone's identity — the smart card companies&nbspwould go out of business. "Google does not want it. Smart card lobby does not want Aadhaar to succeed," he said.&nbsp

The Cambridge Analytica data leak controversy also found mention on Tuesday in the court, which red-flagged the threat of probable misuse of citizens' information by entities which were getting Aadhaar details authenticated by the UIDAI.&nbsp

A five-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra, hearing clutch of petitions challenging Aadhaar and enabling 2016 law, referred to the Cambridge Analytica controversy and said these are not "imaginary apprehensions" and, in the absence of robust data protection law, the issue of misuse of information becomes relevant.

"The real apprehension is that elections are swayed using data analytics. These problems are symptomatic of the world we live in," the bench, also comprising Justices A K Sikri, A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud and Ashok Bhushan, said.

"Please do not bring Cambridge Analytica into this. The UIDAI simply does not have the learning algorithms like Facebook, Google to analyse details of users," senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) and the Gujarat government, said.&nbsp

Besides the Aadhaar Act does not authorise any kind of data analysis, he said, adding the UIDAI has "simple matching algorithms" which give answers like 'yes' or 'no' after it receives a request for Aadhaar authentication from a requesting entity.

The bench, which posed several searching questions, asked the lawyer why the authorities were allowing private entities to use the Aadhaar platform for various purposes and referred to the legal provision to this effect.

"Why are words 'body corporate or any person' used in section 57 of the Act. It breaks the nexus of the Act with the Consolidated Fund of India... What is the point of involving private parties in the Aadhaar infrastructure," the bench asked.

Dwivedi responded by saying that "it does not allow any 'chaiwala' or a 'panwala' to become a requesting entity under the Act. It is a limited exercise. The UIDAI will not approve anyone to become an requesting entity (RE) unless it is satisfied that the particular entity needs to use facility of authentication."&nbsp

He also referred to private companies like Reliance venturing into the defence sector and said at some point in time, the court will have to decide the aspect where private firms were dealing with public functions of the state, which are currently being carried out by public sector companies.

Dwivedi also dealt with the persistent allegation that the people were being given a number identity as was done by dictator Adolf Hitler in Germany.&nbsp

"Hitler counted citizens to identify Jews, Christians etc. Here, we do not seek details like caste, creed and religion from the citizens," he said, adding that the history of numbers began in India and "numbers are beautiful and fascinating".

He also urged the bench not to give in to the "hyper phobia" against the Aadhaar created by the petitioners opposed to the "inclusive scheme" of the government based on a law and the proper infrastructure.&nbsp

(With inputs from PTI)

The counsel for the UIDAI told the court that should the Aadhaar programme succeed — should it turn into a foolproof way to authenticate someone's identity — the smart card companies would go out of business

The Unique Identification Authority of India has made the startling claim that Google and smart card companies do not want the Aadhaar programme to succeed. The claim was made before the Supreme Court on Tuesday. News reports quoted Rakesh Dwivedi, the counsel appearing for the UIDAI, as saying that a campaign had been unelashed against Aadhaar. Dwivedi told the Supreme Court that if the Aadhaar programme were to succeed — should it turn into a foolproof way to authenticate someone's identity — the smart card companies&nbspwould go out of business. "Google does not want it. Smart card lobby does not want Aadhaar to succeed," he said. The Cambridge Analytica data leak controversy also found mention on Tuesday in the court, which red-flagged the threat of probable misuse of citizens' information by entities which were getting Aadhaar details authenticated by the UIDAI. A five-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra, hearing clutch of petitions challenging Aadhaar and enabling 2016 law, referred to the Cambridge Analytica controversy and said these are not "imaginary apprehensions" and, in the absence of robust data protection law, the issue of misuse of information becomes relevant. "The real apprehension is that elections are swayed using data analytics. These problems are symptomatic of the world we live in," the bench, also comprising Justices A K Sikri, A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud and Ashok Bhushan, said. "Please do not bring Cambridge Analytica into this. The UIDAI simply does not have the learning algorithms like Facebook, Google to analyse details of users," senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) and the Gujarat government, said. Besides the Aadhaar Act does not authorise any kind of data analysis, he said, adding the UIDAI has "simple matching algorithms" which give answers like 'yes' or 'no' after it receives a request for Aadhaar authentication from a requesting entity. The bench, which posed several searching questions, asked the lawyer why the authorities were allowing private entities to use the Aadhaar platform for various purposes and referred to the legal provision to this effect. "Why are words 'body corporate or any person' used in section 57 of the Act. It breaks the nexus of the Act with the Consolidated Fund of India... What is the point of involving private parties in the Aadhaar infrastructure," the bench asked. Dwivedi responded by saying that "it does not allow any 'chaiwala' or a 'panwala' to become a requesting entity under the Act. It is a limited exercise. The UIDAI will not approve anyone to become an requesting entity (RE) unless it is satisfied that the particular entity needs to use facility of authentication." He also referred to private companies like Reliance venturing into the defence sector and said at some point in time, the court will have to decide the aspect where private firms were dealing with public functions of the state, which are currently being carried out by public sector companies. Dwivedi also dealt with the persistent allegation that the people were being given a number identity as was done by dictator Adolf Hitler in Germany. "Hitler counted citizens to identify Jews, Christians etc. Here, we do not seek details like caste, creed and religion from the citizens," he said, adding that the history of numbers began in India and "numbers are beautiful and fascinating". He also urged the bench not to give in to the "hyper phobia" against the Aadhaar created by the petitioners opposed to the "inclusive scheme" of the government based on a law and the proper infrastructure. (With inputs from PTI)

Google, smart card companies do not want Aadhaar to succeed: UIDAI to Supreme Court

Enrolment of a mentally-ill woman under the Aadhaar scheme came handy as it helped her reunite with her family after she went missing over four months ago.

The 31-year-old woman was found abandoned on Delhi roads and after being rescued by police, she was sent to short-stay home 'Nirmal Chhaya' by a court which had directed the authorities to help her undergo Aadhaar registration.

In the process of making her Aadhaar card, it was revealed that her biometric records preexisted in the Aadhaar database and the Delhi Police was able to obtain her details from the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI).

The consistent efforts of court to reunite her with her family proved fruitful when Metropolitan Magistrate Abhilash Malhotra was informed by police officials that they have found her antecedents. Her missing complaint was lodged in Malakhera police station in Rajasthan's Alwar district on November 30, 2017.

When the police contacted her husband, he willingly came forward to take her back home.

During a recent hearing, the woman, who was kept in Asha Kiran, a home for the mentally retarded in Rohini, and her husband were brought to the court.

The investigating officer submitted that they have verified the credentials of the man and the police has no objection to reintegration of the woman to her family.

"Accordingly, the patient be handed over to her husband after completion of necessary formalities in Asha Kiran. Husband of the woman is directed to ensure proper treatment of the patient is continued," the magistrate said.

The court also appreciated inspector Devender Kumar Singh, SHO of Kashmere Gate Police Station, and sub inspector Satender Singh for making "untiring efforts" to trace the family of the woman and reuniting her with her family.

The woman, who was found by police near Kashmere Gate in February, was also admitted to IHBAS for treatment.

When the court interacted with her, she was not found in a fit state of mind.

To ascertain the aspect of sexual abuse, she was also examined by the doctors at a government hospital here but they found no visible sign of such assault and her pregnancy test were also negative.

The Supreme Court has been hearing various pleas challenging the constitutional validity of Aadhaar scheme.

Half-way homes serve as a stop-gap place for people who have undergone treatment for mental illness before they venture into the real world.

The high court had in 2009 passed directions for making half-way homes after a public interest litigation was filed on the issue.

&nbsp

In the process of making her Aadhaar card, it was revealed that her biometric records preexisted in the Aadhaar database and the Delhi Police was able to obtain her details from the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI)

Enrolment of a mentally-ill woman under the Aadhaar scheme came handy as it helped her reunite with her family after she went missing over four months ago. The 31-year-old woman was found abandoned on Delhi roads and after being rescued by police, she was sent to short-stay home 'Nirmal Chhaya' by a court which had directed the authorities to help her undergo Aadhaar registration. In the process of making her Aadhaar card, it was revealed that her biometric records preexisted in the Aadhaar database and the Delhi Police was able to obtain her details from the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI). The consistent efforts of court to reunite her with her family proved fruitful when Metropolitan Magistrate Abhilash Malhotra was informed by police officials that they have found her antecedents. Her missing complaint was lodged in Malakhera police station in Rajasthan's Alwar district on November 30, 2017. When the police contacted her husband, he willingly came forward to take her back home. During a recent hearing, the woman, who was kept in Asha Kiran, a home for the mentally retarded in Rohini, and her husband were brought to the court. The investigating officer submitted that they have verified the credentials of the man and the police has no objection to reintegration of the woman to her family. "Accordingly, the patient be handed over to her husband after completion of necessary formalities in Asha Kiran. Husband of the woman is directed to ensure proper treatment of the patient is continued," the magistrate said. The court also appreciated inspector Devender Kumar Singh, SHO of Kashmere Gate Police Station, and sub inspector Satender Singh for making "untiring efforts" to trace the family of the woman and reuniting her with her family. The woman, who was found by police near Kashmere Gate in February, was also admitted to IHBAS for treatment. When the court interacted with her, she was not found in a fit state of mind. To ascertain the aspect of sexual abuse, she was also examined by the doctors at a government hospital here but they found no visible sign of such assault and her pregnancy test were also negative. The Supreme Court has been hearing various pleas challenging the constitutional validity of Aadhaar scheme. Half-way homes serve as a stop-gap place for people who have undergone treatment for mental illness before they venture into the real world. The high court had in 2009 passed directions for making half-way homes after a public interest litigation was filed on the issue.

Aadhaar details help mentally-ill woman reunite with family

Minors, whose Aadhaar card has already been generated, cannot opt out of the Aadhaar scheme after attaining majority, the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) today told the Supreme Court. Attorney General K K Venugopal was referring to the written replies of UIDAI CEO Ajay Bhushan Pandey to the queries posed by the petitioners, opposed to the Aadhaar scheme and its enabling 2016 law, before a five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra.

He said that school authorities can act as introducers to get children, between the age group of 5 to 15 years, enrolled for Aadhaar with the parental consent. Responding to a query whether a child, after attaining the age of 18 years, can opt out, the top law officer told the bench, also comprising justices A K Sikri, A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chanadrachud and Ashok Bhushan, that it is not permissible under the Aadhaar Act, 2016.

“However, residents have the option of permanently locking their biometrics and only temporarily unlocking it when needed for biometric authentication as per Regulation 11 of the Aadhaar (Authentication) Regulations, 2016,” he said. The lawyers for the petitioners had given a list of queries to the UIDAI CEO after he had concluded his PowerPoint Presentation (PPT) to allay apprehensions with regard the Aadhaar scheme.

In response to the query as to what were the Aadhaar authentication failure rates in the states and at the national level, Venugopal said the UIDAI cannot provide authentication failure rates at the state level since it does not track the location of the authentication transactions. Referring to the data, he further said that the biometric failure rates are at 6 per cent for fingerprints and 8.54 per cent for iris at the national level.

“It must be stated that authentication failures do not mean exclusion or denial from subsidies, benefits or services since the requesting entities are obliged under the law to provide for exception handling mechanisms,” he said. In response to a question as to how a leprosy patient or a person, who does not have a mobile number, is being enrolled for Aadhaar, the top law officer said, “Aadhaar enrolment is done for all residents, even of residents with leprosy. Biometric exception process is defined in the UIDAI resident enrolment process.

“In the case of a leprosy patient, who may not be able to do fingerprint authentication, iris authentication can be used for update (and the mobile number added). This was the reason for multi-modal enrolment and authentication being selected for use in Aadhaar.” As part of the exception handling mechanism, the UIDAI has already implemented a digitally signed QR code into eAadhaar which allows agencies to verify the Aadhaar card in an offline manner and trust the data, he said.

Venugopal said that as on March 21, the total number of biometric de-duplication rejections that have taken place are 6.91 crore. “This figure merely pertains to number of applications which have been identified by the Aadhaar de-duplication system as having matching biometrics to an existing Aadhaar number holder… “It is highly improbable for the biometrics to match unless the same person has applied again. There are a number of reasons why the same person might apply more than once.,” he said.

Venugopal said, “For instance, many individuals innocently apply for enrolment multiple times because of the delay in getting their Aadhaar cards due to postal delays, loss or destruction of their cards or confusion about how the system works.” Those whose enrolments have been rejected for any reason and who do not have Aadhaar can re-enrol and obtain it, he said, adding that rejection of enrolments did not mean that a person will never be able to get it.

Minors, whose Aadhaar card has already been generated, cannot opt out of the Aadhaar scheme after attaining majority, the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) today told the Supreme Court.

Minors, whose Aadhaar card has already been generated, cannot opt out of the Aadhaar scheme after attaining majority, the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) today told the Supreme Court. Attorney General K K Venugopal was referring to the written replies of UIDAI CEO Ajay Bhushan Pandey to the queries posed by the petitioners, opposed to the Aadhaar scheme and its enabling 2016 law, before a five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra. He said that school authorities can act as introducers to get children, between the age group of 5 to 15 years, enrolled for Aadhaar with the parental consent. Responding to a query whether a child, after attaining the age of 18 years, can opt out, the top law officer told the bench, also comprising justices A K Sikri, A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chanadrachud and Ashok Bhushan, that it is not permissible under the Aadhaar Act, 2016. “However, residents have the option of permanently locking their biometrics and only temporarily unlocking it when needed for biometric authentication as per Regulation 11 of the Aadhaar (Authentication) Regulations, 2016,” he said. The lawyers for the petitioners had given a list of queries to the UIDAI CEO after he had concluded his PowerPoint Presentation (PPT) to allay apprehensions with regard the Aadhaar scheme. In response to the query as to what were the Aadhaar authentication failure rates in the states and at the national level, Venugopal said the UIDAI cannot provide authentication failure rates at the state level since it does not track the location of the authentication transactions. Referring to the data, he further said that the biometric failure rates are at 6 per cent for fingerprints and 8.54 per cent for iris at the national level. “It must be stated that authentication failures do not mean exclusion or denial from subsidies, benefits or services since the requesting entities are obliged under the law to provide for exception handling mechanisms,” he said. In response to a question as to how a leprosy patient or a person, who does not have a mobile number, is being enrolled for Aadhaar, the top law officer said, “Aadhaar enrolment is done for all residents, even of residents with leprosy. Biometric exception process is defined in the UIDAI resident enrolment process. “In the case of a leprosy patient, who may not be able to do fingerprint authentication, iris authentication can be used for update (and the mobile number added). This was the reason for multi-modal enrolment and authentication being selected for use in Aadhaar.” As part of the exception handling mechanism, the UIDAI has already implemented a digitally signed QR code into eAadhaar which allows agencies to verify the Aadhaar card in an offline manner and trust the data, he said. Venugopal said that as on March 21, the total number of biometric de-duplication rejections that have taken place are 6.91 crore. “This figure merely pertains to number of applications which have been identified by the Aadhaar de-duplication system as having matching biometrics to an existing Aadhaar number holder… “It is highly improbable for the biometrics to match unless the same person has applied again. There are a number of reasons why the same person might apply more than once.,” he said. Venugopal said, “For instance, many individuals innocently apply for enrolment multiple times because of the delay in getting their Aadhaar cards due to postal delays, loss or destruction of their cards or confusion about how the system works.” Those whose enrolments have been rejected for any reason and who do not have Aadhaar can re-enrol and obtain it, he said, adding that rejection of enrolments did not mean that a person will never be able to get it.

Minors can’t opt out of Aadhaar after attaining majority: UIDAI to Supreme Court

A&nbsp;new report has emerged detailing a major data leak in India&#39;s biometric ID programme, Aadhaar, allowing access to private information, business technology news website ZDNet reported on Saturday.

According to the report, a security researcher from New Delhi, Karan Saini found out that one of the state-owned utility company is responsible for the breach.

Saini&nbsp;said that anyone with an Aadhaar number was affected.

The data breach allows anyone with the technical know-how &ldquo;to download private information on all Aadhaar holders&rdquo;. Anyone who knows what they are doing can access the full name, consumer number used by the utility company, and their unique 12-digit identity numbers, and their bank details, ZDNet said.

Even though the security lapse had been flagged to some government agencies over a period of time, it has yet to be fixed. ZDNet said it was withholding the name of the utility and other details.

&quot;This is a security lapse. You don&#39;t have to be a consumer to access these details. You just need the Uniform Resource Locator where the Application Programming Interface is located. These can be found in less than 20 minutes,&quot; Saini told Reuters.

However, UIDAI refuted reports in sections of media sourced from news website which quoted a man purportedly claiming to be a security researcher that a state-owned utility company has vulnerability which can be used to access a huge amount of Aadhaar data including banking details

Officials at UIDAI&nbsp;said: &quot;There is no truth in this story as there has been absolutely no breach of UIDAI&rsquo;s Aadhaar database. Aadhaar remains safe and secure.&quot;

Aadhaar, a biometric identification card with over 1.1 billion users, is the world&#39;s biggest database.

But it has been facing increased scrutiny over privacy concerns following several instances of breaches and misuse.

Last Thursday, the CEO of the UIDAI said the biometric data attached to each Aadhaar was safe from hacking as the storage facility was not connected to the internet.

&quot;Each Aadhaar biometric is encrypted by a 2048-key combination and to decode it, the best and fastest computer of our era will take the age of the universe just to hack into one card&#39;s biometric details,&quot; Ajay Bhushan Pandey said.

(with inputs from Reuters)

Business technology news website ZDNet reported the news on Saturday

A new report has emerged detailing a major data leak in India's biometric ID programme, Aadhaar, allowing access to private information, business technology news website ZDNet reported on Saturday. According to the report, a security researcher from New Delhi, Karan Saini found out that one of the state-owned utility company is responsible for the breach. Saini said that anyone with an Aadhaar number was affected. The data breach allows anyone with the technical know-how “to download private information on all Aadhaar holders”. Anyone who knows what they are doing can access the full name, consumer number used by the utility company, and their unique 12-digit identity numbers, and their bank details, ZDNet said. Even though the security lapse had been flagged to some government agencies over a period of time, it has yet to be fixed. ZDNet said it was withholding the name of the utility and other details. "This is a security lapse. You don't have to be a consumer to access these details. You just need the Uniform Resource Locator where the Application Programming Interface is located. These can be found in less than 20 minutes," Saini told Reuters. However, UIDAI refuted reports in sections of media sourced from news website which quoted a man purportedly claiming to be a security researcher that a state-owned utility company has vulnerability which can be used to access a huge amount of Aadhaar data including banking details Officials at UIDAI said: "There is no truth in this story as there has been absolutely no breach of UIDAI’s Aadhaar database. Aadhaar remains safe and secure." Aadhaar, a biometric identification card with over 1.1 billion users, is the world's biggest database. But it has been facing increased scrutiny over privacy concerns following several instances of breaches and misuse. Last Thursday, the CEO of the UIDAI said the biometric data attached to each Aadhaar was safe from hacking as the storage facility was not connected to the internet. "Each Aadhaar biometric is encrypted by a 2048-key combination and to decode it, the best and fastest computer of our era will take the age of the universe just to hack into one card's biometric details," Ajay Bhushan Pandey said. (with inputs from Reuters)

UIDAI denies allegations of data breach reported by news website

Despite controversies and reports of data breaches, India&#39;s Aadhaar biometric-based identification system was rolled out nationwide. Today, Aadhaar is considered mandatory even for entering an airport or for applying for subsidised rations. &nbsp;

The day was a historic one when India&#39;s ambitious Aadhaar biometric-based identification system was rolled out. Billed as a citizens welfare measure, its origins were rooted in the Kargil Review Committee report which recommended a uniform national identity card for people living in conflict zones. &nbsp;It was subsequently extended to all citizens. 
&nbsp; 
Some of the past years have seen the debate over Aadhaar intensify.&nbsp; 
&nbsp; 
-- There have been complaints of incorrect data 
-- Complaints of cyber insecurity and identity theft 
-- Reports of data breaches and misuse

Analysts and experts questioned whether the government is equipped to handle the Aadhaar database and perils associated with it.&nbsp;

Nevertheless, Aadhaar is now required for those seeking to avail of government benefits; it&#39;s mandatory to cite your Aadhaar number while applying for some of the most vital and crucial personal instruments like PAN Card or a passport. &nbsp;

But, the intricate interlinking and meshing of a person&#39;s sensitive information with Aadhaar has deepened security concerns, simply because so much of data is held onto the servers based in the US.

Compared to the Aadhaar, the US social security number is over eight decades old and began as a government device to track the earnings of American workers for administering benefits under the social security programme. The nine-digit number provides information about geographic location, post office details of a US citizen. Here also, there were looming concerns over duplicate social security numbers, while some people thought the more social security cards they had the better it was.&nbsp;

In Russia, all citizens ageing 14 years and above are issued an internal passport which provides identification and facilitates travel within the country. It also details location or residence, conscription, marriage among other information of a citizen. Plans of introducing a biometric-based identity system were scrapped last year. 
&nbsp; 
What other countries do

-- China has a resident identity card issued by the police to all those ageing 16 years and above which provides name, sex, ethnicity and residence details 
-- Pakistan issues a national identity card to all its citizens ageing 18 years and above which must be shown while applying for a driver&#39;s licence, opening a bank account or getting a passport 
-- Saudi Arabia has a national e-identity card scheme for citizens; the card has biometric details, photograph and a digital signature. 
&nbsp; 
The main aim of establishing a national identity card system varies from country to country. Dictatorships see such cards as a national security measure, they can track their citizens, figure out what they are up to and where they go. Democracies, on the other hand, see it as a mode to empower&nbsp;their citizens, giving them their rights. &nbsp; 
&nbsp; 
However, in both cases, a large amount of personal data is compiled where people disclose&nbsp;personal information including bank accounts and family details. In the West, where personal privacy is taken seriously, the public is aware and vigilant about how the government uses their information. Countries like India have a large population that identifies government&#39;s involvement in their private space as a symbol of security.&nbsp;

Analysts and experts question whether the government is equipped to handle the Aadhaar database and the perils associated with it

Despite controversies and reports of data breaches, India's Aadhaar biometric-based identification system was rolled out nationwide. Today, Aadhaar is considered mandatory even for entering an airport or for applying for subsidised rations. The day was a historic one when India's ambitious Aadhaar biometric-based identification system was rolled out. Billed as a citizens welfare measure, its origins were rooted in the Kargil Review Committee report which recommended a uniform national identity card for people living in conflict zones. It was subsequently extended to all citizens. Some of the past years have seen the debate over Aadhaar intensify. -- There have been complaints of incorrect data -- Complaints of cyber insecurity and identity theft -- Reports of data breaches and misuse Analysts and experts questioned whether the government is equipped to handle the Aadhaar database and perils associated with it. Nevertheless, Aadhaar is now required for those seeking to avail of government benefits; it's mandatory to cite your Aadhaar number while applying for some of the most vital and crucial personal instruments like PAN Card or a passport. But, the intricate interlinking and meshing of a person's sensitive information with Aadhaar has deepened security concerns, simply because so much of data is held onto the servers based in the US. Compared to the Aadhaar, the US social security number is over eight decades old and began as a government device to track the earnings of American workers for administering benefits under the social security programme. The nine-digit number provides information about geographic location, post office details of a US citizen. Here also, there were looming concerns over duplicate social security numbers, while some people thought the more social security cards they had the better it was. In Russia, all citizens ageing 14 years and above are issued an internal passport which provides identification and facilitates travel within the country. It also details location or residence, conscription, marriage among other information of a citizen. Plans of introducing a biometric-based identity system were scrapped last year. What other countries do -- China has a resident identity card issued by the police to all those ageing 16 years and above which provides name, sex, ethnicity and residence details -- Pakistan issues a national identity card to all its citizens ageing 18 years and above which must be shown while applying for a driver's licence, opening a bank account or getting a passport -- Saudi Arabia has a national e-identity card scheme for citizens; the card has biometric details, photograph and a digital signature. The main aim of establishing a national identity card system varies from country to country. Dictatorships see such cards as a national security measure, they can track their citizens, figure out what they are up to and where they go. Democracies, on the other hand, see it as a mode to empower their citizens, giving them their rights. However, in both cases, a large amount of personal data is compiled where people disclose personal information including bank accounts and family details. In the West, where personal privacy is taken seriously, the public is aware and vigilant about how the government uses their information. Countries like India have a large population that identifies government's involvement in their private space as a symbol of security.

Aadhaar: How countries collect mammoth personal data via biometric-based cards

Oxford Dictionaries has chosen &#39;Aadhaar&#39; as the Hindi word of 2017.

The word gained popularity due to Aadhaar card, which was in news last year and is likely to remain in highlight this year as well.

The announcement was made at a session &quot;Oxford Dictionaries&#39; Hindi Word of the Year&quot; during the ongoing Jaipur Literature Festival here.

Other words such as &#39;Mitron&#39;, &#39;Notebandi&#39;, &#39;Gau-Rakshak&#39; were also considered, but the widespread discussions and debates around &#39;Aadhaar&#39; was the reason it was selected as the word of the year, journalist Saurabh Dwivedi said during the discussion.

Writer Pankaj Dubey said new words like &#39;Sleepawastha&#39; (state of sleeping), &#39;Maukatarian&#39; (opportunist) should be coined to express certain moods. Chitra Mudgal objected to the suggestion and instead advocated for the correct use of languages.

&quot;If a person with lack of proper knowledge coins and expresses such words then it can be understood but this is not acceptable when educated people do this,&quot; Mudgal, an author, said.

Poet and writer Ashok Vajpeyi said politicians use Hindi word &#39;Mitron&#39; (friends) which is not grammatically correct, when in fact the correct word is &#39;Mitro&#39; -- an apparent reference to Prime Minister Narendra Modi who uses the term often in his speeches.

Vajpeyi said the responsibility to conserve language lies with people.

&quot;Changes would come, new words would be coined but ultimately the responsibility to conserve the language is on citizens,&quot; he said.

Talking about the languages used by media, journalist Vinod Dua said that media&#39;s job is to provide news in a simple language for the audience, instead of creating a literature while broadcasting the news.

The word gained popularity due to Aadhaar card which was in news last year

Oxford Dictionaries has chosen 'Aadhaar' as the Hindi word of 2017. The word gained popularity due to Aadhaar card, which was in news last year and is likely to remain in highlight this year as well. The announcement was made at a session "Oxford Dictionaries' Hindi Word of the Year" during the ongoing Jaipur Literature Festival here. Other words such as 'Mitron', 'Notebandi', 'Gau-Rakshak' were also considered, but the widespread discussions and debates around 'Aadhaar' was the reason it was selected as the word of the year, journalist Saurabh Dwivedi said during the discussion. Writer Pankaj Dubey said new words like 'Sleepawastha' (state of sleeping), 'Maukatarian' (opportunist) should be coined to express certain moods. Chitra Mudgal objected to the suggestion and instead advocated for the correct use of languages. "If a person with lack of proper knowledge coins and expresses such words then it can be understood but this is not acceptable when educated people do this," Mudgal, an author, said. Poet and writer Ashok Vajpeyi said politicians use Hindi word 'Mitron' (friends) which is not grammatically correct, when in fact the correct word is 'Mitro' -- an apparent reference to Prime Minister Narendra Modi who uses the term often in his speeches. Vajpeyi said the responsibility to conserve language lies with people. "Changes would come, new words would be coined but ultimately the responsibility to conserve the language is on citizens," he said. Talking about the languages used by media, journalist Vinod Dua said that media's job is to provide news in a simple language for the audience, instead of creating a literature while broadcasting the news.

Aadhaar is Oxford dictionary's Hindi word of 2017

A constant critic of Aadhaar, American whistleblower Edward Snowden on Sunday called Aadhaar an &quot;improper gate to services&quot;&nbsp;and suggested that demands to link Aadhaar to bank and telecom services should be criminalised.

While tweeting his comments, Snowden shared an article on Aadhaar written by former chief of the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), KC Verma.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Rarely do former intel chiefs and I agree, but the head of India&#39;s RAW writes <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Aadhaar?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Aadhaar</a> is being abused by banks, telcos, and transport not to police entitlements, but as a proxy for identity&ndash;an improper gate to service. Such demands must be criminalized. <a href="https://t.co/rRSn42XLlQ">https://t.co/rRSn42XLlQ</a>
&mdash; Edward Snowden (@Snowden) <a href="https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/955050455490547712?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 21, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

Snowden has spoken against Aadhaar in the past. Earlier in January, he said the database conceived of by the Indian government could be &quot;<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/edward-snowden-on-aadhaar-no-matter-the-laws-the-result-is-abuse-28613" target="_blank">misused and abused</a>&quot;.

Snowden also spoke out in support of an English daily journalist who did an investigative piece on Aadhaar data being sold for as little as Rs 500. Snowden said the the journalist deserved <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/edward-snowden-suggest-giving-award-to-journalist-exposing-uidai-flaws-28966" target="_blank">an award, not an FIR</a>.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
It is the natural tendency of government to desire perfect records of private lives. History shows that no matter the laws, the result is abuse. <a href="https://t.co/7HSQSZ4T3f">https://t.co/7HSQSZ4T3f</a>
&mdash; Edward Snowden (@Snowden) <a href="https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/949057892069523459?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 4, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

Snowden is a former CIA employee famously known for leaking classified information that exposed a massive surveillance operation run by the CIA. He is currently living under asylum in Russia.

While tweeting his comments, Snowden shared an article on Aadhaar written by a former chief of the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW)

A constant critic of Aadhaar, American whistleblower Edward Snowden on Sunday called Aadhaar an "improper gate to services" and suggested that demands to link Aadhaar to bank and telecom services should be criminalised. While tweeting his comments, Snowden shared an article on Aadhaar written by former chief of the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), KC Verma. Rarely do former intel chiefs and I agree, but the head of India's RAW writes #Aadhaar is being abused by banks, telcos, and transport not to police entitlements, but as a proxy for identity–an improper gate to service. Such demands must be criminalized. https://t.co/rRSn42XLlQ — Edward Snowden (@Snowden) January 21, 2018 × Snowden has spoken against Aadhaar in the past. Earlier in January, he said the database conceived of by the Indian government could be "misused and abused". Snowden also spoke out in support of an English daily journalist who did an investigative piece on Aadhaar data being sold for as little as Rs 500. Snowden said the the journalist deserved an award, not an FIR. It is the natural tendency of government to desire perfect records of private lives. History shows that no matter the laws, the result is abuse. https://t.co/7HSQSZ4T3f — Edward Snowden (@Snowden) January 4, 2018 × Snowden is a former CIA employee famously known for leaking classified information that exposed a massive surveillance operation run by the CIA. He is currently living under asylum in Russia.

Aadhaar 'improper gate to services': Edward Snowden

<a href="http://indianexpress.com/article/what-is/what-is-aadhaar-card-and-where-is-it-mandatory-4587547/">Aadhaar</a>-issuing authority UIDAI on Saturday clarified that no essential service or benefit like medical facility, hospitalisation, school admission or ration through PDS can be denied for the want of the biometric national ID. Significantly, the latest development comes a day after a&nbsp;pregnant woman was denied admission in a hospital in Gurgaon for not furnishing her Aadhaar card.

UIDAI has taken a serious note of some of the cases reported in media recently in which it is claimed that the want of Aadhaar has resulted in the denial of essential services like hospitalisation or medical help by some lower level staffs causing grave inconvenience to people. While real facts behind such claims of denial are being investigated by the concerned agencies and strict action will be taken in case denial has occurred.&nbsp;

UIDAI said in a statement here today that the Government is sensitive to the fact that NO emergency services such as hospitalisation, etc., be denied for the want of any document whatsoever including Aadhaar. Aadhaar is meant to bring transparency and accountability in public service deliveries through effective use of technology and it should not be misused and made an excuse to any denial in the services.

The Cabinet Secretariat has issued instructions&nbsp;dated 19th December&nbsp;2017 to ensure that bonafide beneficiaries are not deprived of their due benefits as alternative provisions have been made in the Aadhaar Act, 2016.

Recent cases of denial of services like hospitalisation by the medical staff due to the lack of Aadhaar card has become a major concern for the UIDAI department.

UIDAI further explained that there are detailed guidelines issued for exception handling mechanism for extending benefits to beneficiaries who do not possess Aadhaar or in cases where Aadhaar authentication is not successful due to any reason. UIDAI is again writing a letter to the Chief Secretaries of all the States/UTs to ensure that Section 7 of Aadhaar Act, 2016 is implemented in its true letter and spirit for all the schemes at the ground level in service deliveries to beneficiaries so that no denial happens due to want of Aadhaar.

&quot;Aadhaar enables people to establish their identity so that they receive their entitlements and exercise their rights without any fear of being excluded.&nbsp;However, there have been some media reports that some service providers are denying essential and other services for want of Aadhaar. Such violations are punishable under respective laws of the land. Under no circumstance, anyone can be denied a service just because he/she doesn&#39;t have an Aadhaar,&quot; the statement said.&nbsp;

If one does not have Aadhaar or if Aadhaar online verification is not successful due to some reason, the agency or department has to provide the service using alternate means of identification and recording them in exception registers, which should be audited periodically by the higher authorities&nbsp;

&quot;If any official of a department denies a service for the lack of Aadhaar or lack of successful verification due to technical or any such reasons, a complaint should be lodged with the higher authorities of those departments for such unlawful denials,&quot; it added.&nbsp;

On Friday, an incident was reported from Gurgaon&rsquo;s Civil Hospital where a pregnant woman was denied admission and she gave birth outside the doors of the hospital. The Hospital has suspended a doctor and a nurse for the alleged lapse and ordered an enquiry into the incident.

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

The UIDAI statement asked government departments/ministries and State/UT governments to ensure that no essential service or benefit shall be denied to a genuine beneficiary for the want of Aadhaar card

Aadhaar-issuing authority UIDAI on Saturday clarified that no essential service or benefit like medical facility, hospitalisation, school admission or ration through PDS can be denied for the want of the biometric national ID. Significantly, the latest development comes a day after a pregnant woman was denied admission in a hospital in Gurgaon for not furnishing her Aadhaar card. UIDAI has taken a serious note of some of the cases reported in media recently in which it is claimed that the want of Aadhaar has resulted in the denial of essential services like hospitalisation or medical help by some lower level staffs causing grave inconvenience to people. While real facts behind such claims of denial are being investigated by the concerned agencies and strict action will be taken in case denial has occurred. UIDAI said in a statement here today that the Government is sensitive to the fact that NO emergency services such as hospitalisation, etc., be denied for the want of any document whatsoever including Aadhaar. Aadhaar is meant to bring transparency and accountability in public service deliveries through effective use of technology and it should not be misused and made an excuse to any denial in the services. The Cabinet Secretariat has issued instructions dated 19th December 2017 to ensure that bonafide beneficiaries are not deprived of their due benefits as alternative provisions have been made in the Aadhaar Act, 2016. Recent cases of denial of services like hospitalisation by the medical staff due to the lack of Aadhaar card has become a major concern for the UIDAI department. UIDAI further explained that there are detailed guidelines issued for exception handling mechanism for extending benefits to beneficiaries who do not possess Aadhaar or in cases where Aadhaar authentication is not successful due to any reason. UIDAI is again writing a letter to the Chief Secretaries of all the States/UTs to ensure that Section 7 of Aadhaar Act, 2016 is implemented in its true letter and spirit for all the schemes at the ground level in service deliveries to beneficiaries so that no denial happens due to want of Aadhaar. "Aadhaar enables people to establish their identity so that they receive their entitlements and exercise their rights without any fear of being excluded. However, there have been some media reports that some service providers are denying essential and other services for want of Aadhaar. Such violations are punishable under respective laws of the land. Under no circumstance, anyone can be denied a service just because he/she doesn't have an Aadhaar," the statement said. If one does not have Aadhaar or if Aadhaar online verification is not successful due to some reason, the agency or department has to provide the service using alternate means of identification and recording them in exception registers, which should be audited periodically by the higher authorities "If any official of a department denies a service for the lack of Aadhaar or lack of successful verification due to technical or any such reasons, a complaint should be lodged with the higher authorities of those departments for such unlawful denials," it added. On Friday, an incident was reported from Gurgaon’s Civil Hospital where a pregnant woman was denied admission and she gave birth outside the doors of the hospital. The Hospital has suspended a doctor and a nurse for the alleged lapse and ordered an enquiry into the incident.

No essential service can be denied for want of Aadhaar: UIDAI

Aadhaar-issuing authority UIDAI on Saturday said no essential service or benefit like medical facility, school admission or ration through PDS can be denied for want of the biometric national ID. 
 
In a statement, Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) asked government departments and state administration &quot;to ensure that no essential service or benefit shall be denied to a genuine beneficiary for the want of Aadhaar whether it is medical help, hospitalisation, school admission or ration through PDS&quot;. 
 
&quot;There are exception handling regulations issued by UIDAI vide its circular dated 24th October 2017, which must be followed to make sure that no beneficiary is denied of benefits for the want of Aadhaar,&quot; it said. 
 
UIDAI said it has taken a serious note of some of the reported cases where want of Aadhaar had resulted in the denial of essential services like hospitalisation or medical help. 
 
&quot;While real facts behind such claims of denial are being investigated by the concerned agencies and strict action will be taken in case denial has occurred,&quot; it said. 
 
UIDAI said Aadhaar is meant to bring transparency and accountability in public service deliveries through effective use of technology and it should not be misused and made an excuse to any denial in the services. 
 
The Cabinet Secretariat had on December 19 last year issue instructions that bonafide beneficiaries are not deprived of their due benefits as alternative provisions have been made in the Aadhaar Act, 2016. 
 
The statement said UIDAI is again writing to Chief Secretaries of all the states/UTs to ensure that Section 7 of Aadhaar Act, 2016 is implemented in its true letter and spirit for all the schemes so that no denial happens due to want of Aadhaar. 
 
Section 7 of Aadhaar Act 2016 has provision for no exclusion - no denials. 
 
&quot;Aadhaar enables people to establish their identity so that they receive their entitlements and exercise their rights without any fear of being excluded. 
 
&quot;However, there have been some media reports that some service providers are denying essential and other services for want of Aadhaar. Such violations are punishable under respective laws of the land. Under no circumstance, anyone can be denied a service just because he/she doesn&#39;t have an Aadhaar,&quot; the statement said. 
 
If one does not have Aadhaar or if Aadhaar online verification is not successful due to some reason, the agency or department has to provide the service using alternate means of identification and recording them in exception registers, which should be audited periodically by the higher authorities. 
 
&quot;If any official of a department denies a service for the lack of Aadhaar or lack of successful verification due to technical or any such reasons, a complaint should be lodged with the higher authorities of those departments for such unlawful denials,&quot; it added.

 
&nbsp;

The Unique Identification Authority of India asked government departments and state administration 'to ensure that no essential service or benefit shall be denied to a genuine beneficiary for the want of Aadhaar whether it is medical help, hospitalisation, school admission or ration through PDS'

Aadhaar-issuing authority UIDAI on Saturday said no essential service or benefit like medical facility, school admission or ration through PDS can be denied for want of the biometric national ID. In a statement, Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) asked government departments and state administration "to ensure that no essential service or benefit shall be denied to a genuine beneficiary for the want of Aadhaar whether it is medical help, hospitalisation, school admission or ration through PDS". "There are exception handling regulations issued by UIDAI vide its circular dated 24th October 2017, which must be followed to make sure that no beneficiary is denied of benefits for the want of Aadhaar," it said. UIDAI said it has taken a serious note of some of the reported cases where want of Aadhaar had resulted in the denial of essential services like hospitalisation or medical help. "While real facts behind such claims of denial are being investigated by the concerned agencies and strict action will be taken in case denial has occurred," it said. UIDAI said Aadhaar is meant to bring transparency and accountability in public service deliveries through effective use of technology and it should not be misused and made an excuse to any denial in the services. The Cabinet Secretariat had on December 19 last year issue instructions that bonafide beneficiaries are not deprived of their due benefits as alternative provisions have been made in the Aadhaar Act, 2016. The statement said UIDAI is again writing to Chief Secretaries of all the states/UTs to ensure that Section 7 of Aadhaar Act, 2016 is implemented in its true letter and spirit for all the schemes so that no denial happens due to want of Aadhaar. Section 7 of Aadhaar Act 2016 has provision for no exclusion - no denials. "Aadhaar enables people to establish their identity so that they receive their entitlements and exercise their rights without any fear of being excluded. "However, there have been some media reports that some service providers are denying essential and other services for want of Aadhaar. Such violations are punishable under respective laws of the land. Under no circumstance, anyone can be denied a service just because he/she doesn't have an Aadhaar," the statement said. If one does not have Aadhaar or if Aadhaar online verification is not successful due to some reason, the agency or department has to provide the service using alternate means of identification and recording them in exception registers, which should be audited periodically by the higher authorities. "If any official of a department denies a service for the lack of Aadhaar or lack of successful verification due to technical or any such reasons, a complaint should be lodged with the higher authorities of those departments for such unlawful denials," it added.

uidai

Uidai, News on Uidai, stories on Uidai, articles on Uidai, Uidai stories at Wion, Uidai news, Uidai latest news