GS: If it is indeed such a affirmative action law, it needs to stand constitutional scrutiny. Stated purpose of the law is not necessarily the proper purpose of the law for constitutional..
GS: the law really does not achieve its stated purpose which is seamless delivery. The same delivery points remain under the 144 notifications.
DYC J agrees and says in a legislation such as this, we need a hierarchy of regulators.
The identity of the manual scavenger cannot be further entrenched. It has to be removed. Can you deny a person rehabilitation on any condition and...
And the means used are clearly not the least restrictive.
The doctrine of mere possibility of misuse does not apply here because there is actual denial of rights and infringment demonstrated.
GS: After yesterday's judgment, the value of the 2011 standing committee report becomes important. There are a number of problems in the Act...but most importantly...
GS: Reliefs claimed.
1. Act to be struck down.
2. All data destroyed and structures dismantled.
3. In cases of deprivation amounting to death, compensation should be given to the families of the deceased.
Anand Grover finishes his brief submission after handing over his written submissions. He points out how safeguards and contracts have not been rebutted and how 139AA is specifically challenged in his petition.
AP Datar will continue at 2.30 pm.
Pith and substance doctrine has no applicability here in interpreting an article. Only legislative entries.
It can at best be a financial bill of category 3.
Refers to Khihoto Hollohan and a Pakistani Supreme Court decision to state that the whole Act should b declared null
So more ease for money launderers and more hassles for bona fide account operators, with a threat of account freeze!
This is among the most important cases before SC. 100 crore people are involved.
1. No Aadhaar for anything outside 7.
2. Within 7 strict scrutiny of every notification.
3. Definite choice for opt-out.
4. Absolutely make it optional for vulnerable groups - manual labourers, farmers, old age persons
APD: we constantly talk of Digital India. Digital Indians should not mean the means to achieve that Goal.
Implications of non money bill being passed as a money bill is immense. Violation of the basic structure...as it disables one half...
PC: No provision in our Constitution to sever and save an invalidly enacted legislation. Unlike Australian constitution.
K.V.Viswanathan begins his rejoinder.
1. Least Restrictive means is a facet of proportionality. Contrary proposition by Dwivedi is totally incorrect.
2. Theory of Balancing. No balancing among the bundle of rights of individual.
In this case no evidence by state of fraud etc. We have shown how identity fraud is a really really a negligible % of frauds.
He is rejoining on section 7 to show all vested rights cannot be conditioned on aadhaar.
KVV: That is only putting people against people. An argument of convenience. It is the state's duty to have strong internal enforcement mechanisms. The whole burden cannot be shifted to the citizen!
PV Surendran Sr. Advocate will be the final batsman.
A-G comments that this is the second longest hearing in the history of the Supreme Court after Keshavananda.