1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 494 OF 2012 JUSTICE K.S.PUTTASWAMY (RETD.) AND ANR. ...PETITIONERS VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ... RESPONDENTS WITH T.C.(C) No.151/2013, T.C.(C) No.152/2013, W.P.(C) No.833/2013 (PIL­W), W.P.(C) No.829/2013 (PIL­W), T.P. (C) No.1797/2013, W.P.(C) No.932/2013 (PIL­W), T.P.(C) No.1796/2013, CONMT. PET.(C) No.144/2014 In W.P.(C) No.494/2012 (PIL­W), T.P.(C) No.313/2014, T.P.(C) No.312/2014, SLP(Crl.) No.2524/2014, W.P.(C) No.37/2015 (PIL­W), W.P.(C) No.220/2015 (PIL­W), CONMT. PET.(C) No.674/2015 In W.P.(C) No.829/2013 (PIL­W), T.P.(C) No.921/2015, CONMT. PET.(C) No.470/2015 In W.P.(C) No.494/2012 (PIL­W), W.P.(C) No.231/2016 (PIL­W), CONMT. PET.(C) No.444/2016 In W.P.(C) No.494/2012 (PIL­W), CONMT. PET.(C) No.608/2016 In W.P.(C) No.494/2012 (PIL­W), W.P.(C) No.797/2016 (PIL­W), CONMT. PET.(C) No.844/2017 In W.P.(C) No.494/2012 (PIL­W), W.P.(C) No.342/2017 (PIL­ W), W.P.(C) No.372/2017, W.P.(C) No.841/2017, W.P.(C) No.1058/2017 (PIL­W), W.P.(C) No.966/2017 (PIL­W), W.P.(C) No. 1014/2017 (PIL­W), W.P. (C) No.1002/2017 (PIL­W), W.P.(C) No.1056/2017 and CONMT. PET.(C) No.34/2018 in W.P.(C) No.1014/2017 (PIL­W) J U D G M E N T ASHOK BHUSHAN, J. The challenge in this batch of cases can be 2 divided in two parts, firstly, the challenge to Executive's Scheme dated 28.01.2009 notified by the Government of India, by which the Unique Identification Authority of India (hereinafter referred to as “UIDAI”) was constituted to implement the UIDAI Scheme, and secondly challenge to The Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as “Act, 2016”). 2. The group of cases can be divided into four broad heads. First head consists of the sixteen Writ Petitions filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India in this Court challenging the notification dated 28.01.2009 and/or the Act, 2016. Second group consists of seven Transfer Cases/Transfer petitions to be heard alongwith Writ Petitions filed under Article 32. Group three consists of only one Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 2524 of 2014 filed by UIDAI and Anr. Fourth group consists of seven Contempt 3 Petitions, which have been filed alleging violation of the interim orders passed by this Court in Writ Petitions and SLP (Criminal) as noted above. 3. Before we come to the different prayers made in the Writ Petitions wherein Executive Scheme dated 28.01.2009 as well as Act, 2016 has been challenged, it is useful to notice certain background facts, which lead to issuance of notification dated 28.01.2009 as well as the Act, 2016. 4. India is a country, which caters a sea of population. When the British left our country in 1947, total population of the country was only 330 million, which has rapidly increased into enormous figure of 1.3 billion as on date. The Citizenship Act, 1955 was enacted by the Parliament for the acquisition and determination of Indian Citizenship. Our constitutional framers have provided for adult franchise to every adult citizens. Election Commission of India had taken steps to provide for an identity 4 card to each person to enable him to exercise his franchise. The Citizenship Act, 1955 was amended by the Act 6 of 2004 whereas Section 14A was inserted providing that Central Government may compulsorily register every citizen of India and issue national identity card to him. The Planning Commission of the Government of India conceived a Unique Identification Project for providing a Unique Identity Number for each resident across the country, which was initially envisaged primarily as the basis for the efficient delivery of welfare services. 5. At first, in the year 2006, administrative approval was granted for the project “Unique Identity for BPL Families”. A Process Committee was constituted, which prepared a strategic vision on the Unique Identification Project. The Process Committee furnished a detailed proposal to the Planning Commission in the above regard. The Prime Minister approved the constitution of an empowered Group of Ministers to collate the two spheres, the national 5 population register under the Citizenship Act, 1955 and the Unique Identification Number Project of the Department of Information Technology. The empowered Group of Ministers recognised the need for creating an identity related resident database and to establish an institutional mechanism, which shall own the database and shall be responsible for its maintenance and updations on ongoing basis. The empowered Group of Ministers held various meetings to which inputs were provided from different sources including Committee of Secretaries. The recommendation of empowered Group of Ministers to constitute Unique Identification Authority of India (hereinafter referred to as “UIDAI”) was accepted with several guidelines laying down the roles and responsibilities of the UIDAI. The UIDAI was constituted under the aegis of Planning Commission of India. The Notification dated 28.01.2009 was issued constituting the UIDAI, providing for its composition, roles and responsibilities. 6 6. In the year 2010, a bill namely the National Identification Authority of India Bill, 2010 providing for the establishment of the National Identification Authority of India for the purpose of issuing identification numbers to individuals residing in India and to certain other classes of individuals, manner of authentication of such individuals to facilitate access to benefits and services to which they are entitled and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto was introduced. The Bill was pending in the Parliament when the first Writ Petition i.e. Writ Petition (C) No. 494 of 2012 – Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors. Was filed. The Writ Petition under Article 32 was filed on the ground that fundamental rights of the innumerable citizens of India namely Right to Privacy falling under Article 21 of the Constitution of India are adversely affected by the Executive action of the Central Government proceeding to implement an Executive order dated 28.01.2009 and thereby issuing Aadhaar numbers to both citizens as also illegal 7 immigrants presently illegally residing in the country. While the Bill namely “National Identification Authority of India Bill, 2010”, which had already been introduced in the Rajya Sabha on 03.12.2010 and referred to the Standing Committee, had been rejected. The Writ Petition prayed for following reliefs:­ (A) ISSUE a writ in the nature of mandamus restraining the respondents Nos. 1 to 3 from issuing Aadhaar Numbers by way of implementing its Executive order dated 28.01.2009 (Annexure “P­1”) which tentamount to implementing the provisions of the National Identification Authority of India Bill, 2010 pending before the Parliament until and unless the said Bill is considered and passed by the Parliament and becomes an Act of Parliament. (B) Pass such other order/s as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. 7. Writ Petition (C) No. 829 of 2013 ­ Mr. S.G. Vombatkere & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors., was filed by Mr. S.G. Vombatkere and Bezwada Wilson questioning the UID Project and Aadhaar Scheme. The UID Project and Aadhaar Scheme were contended to be illegal and 8 violative of fundamental rights. It was also contended that the Scheme has no legislative sanction. Various other grounds for attacking the Scheme were enumerated in the Writ Petition. Writ Petition (C) No. 833 of 2013 – Ms. Aruna Roy & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors., was also filed challenging the UID Scheme. Other Writ Petitions being Writ Petition (C) No. 932 of 2013 and Writ Petition (C) No. 37 of 2015 came to be filed challenging the UID Scheme. 8. S.G. Vombatkere and Bezwada Wilson filed another Writ Petition (C) No. 220 of 2015 challenging the exercise of preparation of the National Population Register. Section 14A of the Citizenship Act, 1955 was also challenged as void and ultra vires. Petitioners have referred to earlier Writ Petition (C) No. 829 of 2013 and adopted the grounds already raised in the earlier Writ Petition. Writ petitioner had also challenged the collection of confidential biometric informations, which is neither sanctioned nor authorised under any Act or Rules. 9 9. The Parliament enacted the Act, 2016, which contains following preamble:­ “An Act to provide for, as a good governance, efficient, transparent, and targeted delivery of subsidies, benefits and services, the expenditure for which is incurred from the Consolidated Fund of India, to individuals residing in India through assigning of unique identity numbers to such individuals and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.” 10. The Writ Petition (C) No. 231 of 2016­ Shri Jairam Ramesh Vs. Union of India & Ors., was filed by Shri Jairam Ramesh seeking a direction declaring the Act, 2016 as unconstitutional, null and void and ultra vires. Writ Petition (C) No. 797 of 2016 ­ S.G. Vombatkere & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors., was also filed by S.G. Vombatkere and Bezwada Wilson challenging the Act, 2016. The petitioners have also referred to earlier Writ Petition (C) No.