A Supreme Court of India PIL filed under Article 32 seeks directions restricting Aadhaar use strictly to identity verification, alleging its expanding application in administrative and electoral processes exceeds legally permitted limits and raises concerns regarding misuse, governance practices, and constitutional safeguards for citizens’ data.
A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed before the Supreme Court of India under Article 32 of the Constitution seeking directions to limit the use of Aadhaar strictly to identity verification purposes. The plea argues that Aadhaar is increasingly being used in administrative and electoral processes in a manner that allegedly exceeds the scope permitted under law.
The petition has been filed by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, who contends that the legal framework governing Aadhaar does not recognise it as proof of citizenship, domicile, address or date of birth.
According to the plea, Section 9 of the Aadhaar Act, 2016, along with notifications issued by the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), makes it clear that Aadhaar merely establishes identity and cannot be treated as conclusive proof for any other legal or administrative purpose.
Despite these statutory limitations, the petition claims that Aadhaar is currently being accepted and relied upon in a wide range of official activities, including school admissions, issuance of ration cards, property transactions, driving licences and birth certificates.
The plea particularly challenges the use of Aadhaar in electoral processes, especially its inclusion as an acceptable document in Form-6 used for fresh voter registration under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960.
According to the petitioner, this creates a legal contradiction because Aadhaar is allegedly being used to establish eligibility conditions such as age and residence, even though UIDAI itself has clarified that the document cannot serve as proof of date of birth or residential address.
The petition argues that such practices dilute the safeguards intended to ensure that only eligible citizens are enrolled in electoral rolls.
The PIL further contends that the present verification mechanism under Form-6 is insufficient and may permit inclusion of individuals in electoral rolls without adequate supporting documents.
It argues that the current system undermines the statutory safeguards contained in the Representation of the People Act, 1950, particularly Section 23(4), which, according to the petitioner, allows Aadhaar to be used only for identity authentication purposes.
ALSO READ: Can Aadhaar Determine Citizenship? Supreme Court Debates ECI’s Voter Verification Methods
The plea raises broader constitutional concerns as well, referring to Articles 14, 19, 21, 326 and 327 of the Constitution of India.
According to the petition, misuse or overextension of Aadhaar beyond identity verification may result in unequal treatment between citizens and non-citizens in matters relating to electoral participation and could potentially affect the integrity of the democratic process.
In its prayers, the petitioner has sought a declaration that using Aadhaar as proof of date of birth and residence in voter registration forms is unconstitutional, arbitrary and legally invalid.
The plea also seeks directions to the Union government, State authorities and the Election Commission of India to ensure that Aadhaar remains confined strictly to identity verification purposes.
Additionally, the PIL calls for a comprehensive restructuring of the verification system used in electoral processes. It proposes the creation of a high-powered monitoring committee comprising a retired Supreme Court judge along with experts in cybersecurity and forensic analysis to supervise reforms and strengthen authentication mechanisms.
The petition also seeks stronger technological safeguards, including secure digital verification systems aimed at preventing alleged misuse of identity documents and improving the reliability of electoral and welfare databases.
According to the plea, these measures are necessary to safeguard the integrity of electoral rolls and to ensure that constitutional rights and welfare benefits are extended only to legally eligible individuals.
The petition has also sought any additional directions that the Supreme Court may deem appropriate in the interest of constitutional governance and justice.
Case Title: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India & Ors.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE