#Aadhaar hearing continues. Rakesh Dwivedi, Sr. Adv continues his submissions on the behalf of UIDAI and the State of Gujarat.
Briefly disconnected. Discussion on Section 7. CJI and DYC J have suggestion to how to argue this point to RD.
DYC J says that the parliament in its wisdom has decided there is leakage and that to implement Part IV rights, we will need to defer to that.
RD agrees and repeats..
DYC J says that the parliament in its wisdom has decided there is leakage and that to implement Part IV rights, we will need to defer to that.
RD agrees and repeats..
...the point of for the first time people having to come to face to face.
DYC J does not agree to that proposition...says State has the duty to ensure Part IV rights irrespective.
DYC J does not agree to that proposition...says State has the duty to ensure Part IV rights irrespective.
More discussion between CJI and RD on how many villages have fair price shops.
RD reading now from Page 53 how certain countries have economic social rights and right to welfare in their respective Bills of Rights.
RD now reading the Statement of Objects of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.
He is now reading from Subramanian Swamy judgment of Justice Dipak Misra.
Page 318 as reported in SCC.
Page 318 as reported in SCC.
In dealing with balancing of rights. In Swamy's case which challenged criminal defamation provision, it was right of freedom of speech v right to reputation.
Next he is reading from Asharanjan case 2017 4 SCC 397. Paras 57 through 62.
"Larger public interest" and "interest of the collective" is the guiding factor when there is a conflict of fundamental rights...especially when it is within the same article right...example 21 v 21.
DYC J adds in saying the conflict can arise not between two individuals...but even for the same individual, conflict between two rights.
DYC J says how this Court had never accepted the suppression of civil liberties at that ground. RD says Aadhaar is not suppression of civil liberties.
CJI advices RD to structure his submissions to articulate it as a Article 21 and minimal intrusion.
Minimality of intrusion will take care of balancing and Article 21 for many will be the legitimate state interest.
Minimality of intrusion will take care of balancing and Article 21 for many will be the legitimate state interest.
RD: He is on balancing. How balance is the symbol for justice. No two extremes. Nothing should cease to exist. Both should coexist.
"Balancing wheel" emanates from the Buddha, he says. (Me thinks: !!!)
RD Reads this... 
RD cites how Govt can go ahead and ban prostitution or manual scavenging even if people who are engaged in such work are doing it by choice for his argument on balancing. Choice v his/her dignity...
DYC J cites @gidla_sujatha in 'Ant among the elephants' as a telling commentary on the reality of manual scavenging. ( cc:@monteskw )
Sikri J asks if RD's section 7 arguments are over. (Me thinks: sense some restlessness).
RD says yes and moves to his next argument on "Reasonable Expectation of Privacy"
RD says yes and moves to his next argument on "Reasonable Expectation of Privacy"
(Me thinks: who argued this position for petitioners??)
RD: All data collected by Aadhaar is basic data. Collected almost everywhere. Bank, bar council, university etc etc.
RD: No reasonable expectation of privacy against collection of demographic data.
DYC J asks if his argument that there is no reasonable expecation of privacy in demographic data because it is already in public realm.
RD says yes.
DYC j points out how race caste religion etc are excluded in the Act. RD agrees in glee.
RD says yes.
DYC j points out how race caste religion etc are excluded in the Act. RD agrees in glee.
Sikri J says it is a question of apprehension of using the data in a manner and for purposes unauthorised and against the individual.
RD says fear has to be real not fantastic.
CJI says RD cannot make those subjective judgment on that.
RD says fear has to be real not fantastic.
CJI says RD cannot make those subjective judgment on that.
RD says he will respond from Koodankulam judgment.
RD to finish by Wednesday Lunch. All respondents to finish by next week.
Gopal Sankaranarayanan, counsel for @ccsindia informs the Court that sci.gov.in has been hacked and that is the level of encryption with GoI
RD to finish by Wednesday Lunch. All respondents to finish by next week.
Gopal Sankaranarayanan, counsel for @ccsindia informs the Court that sci.gov.in has been hacked and that is the level of encryption with GoI
Laughter allround. A-G says SCI should learn from UIDAI. CEO nods in agreement.
Petitioners to get 1.5 days for rejoinder.
Petitioners to get 1.5 days for rejoinder.
No hearing in the second half today. Special Bench today for Sahara/SEBI matter.
