The Supreme Court hearing the validity of the Aadhaar scheme observed on Wednesday that in an age when the State has to tackle terrorism and money laundering, State interest must prevail when it comes to maintaining surveillance over citizens. However, it must be balanced with the right to privacy of citizens, it added. A five judge bench is hearing a bunch of 27 petitions challenging the validity of the Aadhaar programme.
The observations came following arguments made by senior advocate Shyam Divan who attacked the Aadhaar scheme to be unconstitutional as it resulted in a police State where the Government tracks its citizens and uses their biometric data without assuring safety.
Dealing with the arguments, a five-judge Bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justices AK Sikri, AM Khanwilkar, DY Chandrachud, and Ashok Bhushan said, “We live in the times when the country is faced with widespread problems of terrorism and money laundering. Though there is a State interest in tracking thousands of crores of rupees Government spends for social welfare schemes and programmes, a balance must be maintained between State interest and citizens' right to protect their privacy."
Divan said the Central Identities Data Repository (CIDR) that stored and managed Aadhaar data of all citizens leads to profiling of individuals by the State. He said such a State of surveillance can be likened to Nazi regime where each movement or transaction of any citizen can be tracked.
The Court asked Divan if the state could be justified in seeking these details if citizens willingly part with similar data to private entities. Divan replied, "When you are tracked by the State in real time, it tantamounts to a police State. The Constitution does not allow this. Google is not the Indian State, and the issue is one of consent also."