Thread by @SFLCin

#Aadhaar final hearing- Day 14: Hearing to commence shortly.

Senior Advocate Arvind Datar commences his arguments.

There was a delay in the hearing as the bench was listening to another matter.

Shyam Divan brings the attention to the court to the order passed on 15th December, 2018 regarding clarity on the deadline of 31st March for linking.

Arvind Datar continues. Says no counter has been filed in case of his petition.

AD: Lists his arguments:
1. Money Bill.
2. Amended PMLA rules- rule 9 are violative of Article 14 of Constitution.

AD: w.r.t. the PMLA rules reads the master directions- KYC direction 2016.

Tweets are not going through. Twitter rejecting tweets saying duplicate tweets.

AD: Submits that the RBI circular is a complete circular passed under the PMLA act itself wherein you can open accounts using any of the 6 IDs given in the circular.
However, these PMLA rules make it mandatory to use only Aadhaar.

AD: Says that when the option to use any of the 6 IDs is already there, can you make only one ID compulsory under other rules?

AD: Reads the PMLA rules. Says that Aadhaar and PAN or Form 60 are necessary to be provided for bank accounts.

AD: Says that Aadhaar is only required to establish the identity of the individuals not the companies. You cannot ask for Aadhaar of the individuals in the company.

Bench rises for lunch. To continue at 2:30 pm.

Bench reassembles after lunch. Arvind Datar to continue with his submissions.

AD: The impunged rules say that if the Aadhaar number is not provided then the accounts will stop operating.

Further reads on the rules.

AD: Says that as per the rules, if a person is holding a bank account, he'll have to submit Aadhaar. If he doesn't, his account will become inoperational till such time the person submits Aadhaar.

AD:
Grounds of challenge:
1. It is in violation of SC order which made Aadhaar voluntary and limited to only specific schemes.
2. Violates 300A. Deprives a person of his property.

DYC J: They are not forfeiting the property. The amount in the account will not get forfeited.
AD: Says they are depriving me of the property- deprivation maybe temporary or permanent.

AD: Says even if Aadhaar Act is assumed valid, the enrolment form says that Aadhaar is free and voluntary.
But now Aadhaar has been made mandatory for everything. Gives examples.

AD: Says that Aadhaar is entitlement. I am entitled to passport. I may or may not obtain a passport.

AD: Says there is a class of people who don't need an Aadhaar.
Law recognises two categories of people- who want an Aadhaar and who do not want an Aadhaar. There's a choice. But not so in case of PMLA rules. A person runs a risk of getting his account closed.

DYC J: Says the disability to be able to operate bank accounts doesn't occur from Aadhaar Act. It does in case of PMLA rules.

AD: Says that Aadhaar is supposed to be 'some kind of national detergent' which will get rid of the fake PAN cards and fake bank accounts.

AD: Says that you can't make a group as suspects. Also questions the reason behind linking Aadhaar with bank accounts.

CJI: You're an account holder and have a status. The statute wants you to establish your identity.
Asks if the argument here is that in light of existing KYC identification systems, we do not need another.

AD: Says that there is no reason why 1 billion people are being asked to link their accounts to Aadhaar. There must be some purpose behind it.

AD going into the PMLA Act and its objective.

AD: Says that any rule made must have a nexus with the Act.
Says that as far as rule 9 regarding Aadhaar is concerned, it has no nexus with the Act.

AD: Says that it is not the intention of govt. of india that every transaction from every account should be reported. It is only in connection with the money laundering that the Act has nexus with accounts.

AD: Comes to the call drop case.

DYC J: Master circular was released by RBI is under the Banking Regulation Act. And the rules were enacted under the PMLA Act. These two are enacted under two different legislations unlike the case in Cellular Operators.

AD: Asks the court to look at the source of power. Says that circular derives its authority from both PMLA rules and Section 73 of the Act.

DYC J: Says that RBI releasing the circular, objective was not money laundering but that RBI wanted to establish the identity of clients and monitor the accounts.

AD: Says he will finish the arguments by lunch tomorrow.
Requests the court to consider the interim order.
Attorney General asks the court to consider it in the last week of March.

Bench rises for the day. To continue tomorrow at 11:30 am.