Contents

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .............................................................................................................. 2

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES ................................................................................................................ 3
BOOKS REFERRED ....................................................................................................................... 3
STATUTES REFERRED ................................................................................................................. 3
LIST OF WEBSITES REFERRED ................................................................................................ 3
TABLE OF CASES........................................................................................................................... 4
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION ................................................................................................... 5
STATEMENT OF FACTS ................................................................................................................... 6
STATEMENT OF ISSUES .................................................................................................................. 7
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS .......................................................................................................... 8
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED ............................................................................................................... 9
PRAYER .............................................................................................................................................. 17

SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER

 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

1. Art. : Article

2. Hon’ble : Honourable

3. NGO : Non-Governmental Organization

4. PIL : Public Interest Litigation

5. SC : Supreme Court

6. UIADI : Unique Identification Authority of India

7. v./vs. : Versus

SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER 2

 INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

BOOKS REFERRED

1. D.D. BASU: “INTRODUCTION TO THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA”, LEXIS

NEXIS, NAGPUR, 20TH EDITION.(2012).

STATUTES REFERRED

1. THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950.

LIST OF WEBSITES REFERRED

1. https://www.lawnotes.in

2. https://indiankanoon.org

3. http://www.lawyersclubindia.com

4. https://www.lawctopus.com

5. https://www.legalbites.in

SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER 3

 TABLE OF CASES

SL No. NAME OF THE CASE CITATION

1. Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.), and Another v. Union AIR 2015 SC 3081

of India and Others

2. People’s Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India (1997) 1 SCC 301

3. PUCL v. Union of India AIR 1991 SC 207

4. R. Rajagopal v. State of Tamil Nadu (1994) 6 SCC 632

5. R.M. Malkani v. State of ... State of Maharashtra (1973) 2 SCR 417

6. Malik Bros v. Narendra Dadhich (1999) 6 SCC 552

7. J P Unnikrishnan vs. State of Andhra Pradesh 1993 SCC (1) 645.

8. R.M.Malkani ...Vs... State of Maharashtra AIR 1973 S.C. 157

9. M. P. Sharma And Others vs Satish Chandra 1954 AIR 300, 1954

SCR 1077

SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER 4

 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The PIL has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Indiana

under Article 21 of the constitution of Indiana.

The right to privacy is vested within right to life and liberty under Article 21. Part III of the

Constitution of Indiana (Articles 12 through 35) is titled ‘fundamental rights’ and lists out

several rights which are regarded as fundamental to all citizens of Indiana.

Wherein, Article 21 reads as under:

Protection of Life and Personal Liberty –“No person shall be deprived of his life or

personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.”

SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER 5

 STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. The Republic of Indiana is a sovereign, socialist, secular, democratic republic,

assuring its citizens of justice, equality, and liberty, and endeavors to

promote fraternity among them. The Republic of Indiana has a democratic

parliamentary form of government and provides an independent judiciary.

2. The Fundamental Rights, defined in Part III of the Constitution, apply irrespective of

race, place of birth, religion, caste, creed, or gender.

3. The Unique Identification Authority of Indiana (UIDAI) is a statutory authority

established by the Government of India under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of

Electronics and Information Technology.

4. The UIDAI has been aiming to issue an Aadhar number to all the residents ensuring

that it is robust enough to eliminate duplicate and fake identities. This policy aims at

saving duplicity of identities, identifying illegal immigrants, checking the leakage in

the government schemes and preventing corruption. For obtaining the Aadhar Card,

applicant has to provide his biometric data.

5. Aadhar is the world's largest biometric ID card programme.

6. Aadhar Card is made mandatory by Government to avail the benefits under various

social welfare schemes.

7. People’s Forum for Protection of Civil Liberty has filed a Public Interest Litigation

against the Union of Indiana in the Honorable Supreme Court of Indiana, contending

that the collection of the biometric data for the purpose of Aadhar Card violates the

Right to privacy of the citizens. The Petitioner contends that this is a violation of

Article 21 of the Constitution of Indiana which grants “right to Privacy” as a

fundamental right.

SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER 6

 STATEMENT OF ISSUES

1. Whether the petitioner has locus standi in the instant case?

2. Whether “right to privacy” is guaranteed in the Part III of Constitution of Indiana?

3. Whether the Aadhar Card Scheme is Unconstitutional and violates the provisions of
Part III of the Constitution of Indiana?

4. Any Other ancillary issue, if any.

SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER 7

 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

1. Whether the petitioner has locus standi in the instant case?

 It is humbly submitted before the Hon’ble Court that the PIL in the instant case is

maintainable.

 As per Art. 32 of the Constitution of Indiana, the PIL is in the interest of the public is

at stake.

 The PIL is with regard to the enforcement of the fundamental rights that has been

violated. Right to privacy and equality has been violated. The litigation is in the interest

of the public at large, majorly concerning the privacy of the citizens.

2. Whether “right to privacy” is guaranteed in the Part III of Constitution of

Indiana?

a) It is humbly submitted by the Appellant that Right to Privacy has been accepted by the

SC in the case of K.S. Puttaswamy, as a constitutionally protected fundamental right. It

is an integral part of Right to life and Personal liberty, and any restriction imposed on

it should be in accordance with procedure established by law.

b) Right to Privacy is an integral part of Right to life and Personal Liberty, and it can be

curtailed only in accordance with the “Procedure established by Law”, as provided

under Art. 21 of the Constitution of Indiana.

3. Whether the Aadhar Card Scheme is Unconstitutional and violates the provisions

of Part III of the Constitution of Indiana?

It is humbly submitted before the Hon’ble Court that the Aadhar Scheme by the

government of Indiana is unconstitutional as they are in violation of Part III of the

Constitution of Indiana, which guarantees the people certain fundamental rights. It

violates right to privacy, equality and right to freedom of speech and expression.

SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER 8

 ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

1. Whether the petitioner has locus standi in the instant case?

It is humbly submitted before the Hon’ble Court that the Public Interest Litigation in the instant

case is maintainable. A PIL to be maintainable requires locus standi which means the power to

stand before the court. A PIL is a litigation which vindicates a right of a large number of people,

perhaps millions, or redresses a wrong done to them. The basic principle behind a PIL is that

the petitioner should seek the benefit of public at large and he should not have his own motive

to be served by the outcome of such PIL and only when any constitutional provision has been

compromised. A PIL can be filed by any member or NGO or any institution working for the

betterment of the society at large.

1.1 Locus Standi

The petitioners seek the Art.32 of the Indian Constitution as the locus standi, which is a

fundamental right in itself; it is the right of every aggrieved citizen to move to the Supreme

Court. Article 32 says:

Article 32. Remedies for enforcement of rights conferred by this Part-

1. The right to move the Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement

of the rights conferred by this part is guaranteed,

2. The Supreme Court shall have power to issue directions or orders or writs, including

writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, Quo warranto and

Certiorari, whichever may be appropriate, for the enforcement of any of the rights

conferred by this part.

SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER 9

 3. Without prejudice to the powers conferred on the Supreme Court by clauses (1) and (2),

Parliament may by law empower any other court to exercise within the local limits of

its jurisdiction all or any of the powers exercisable by the Supreme Court under clause

(2).

4. The right guaranteed by this article shall not be suspended except as otherwise provided

for by this Constitution.

Article 32, thus provides for an expeditious and in expensive remedy for the protection of the

fundamental rights from legislative and executive interference.

In the instant matter, the right to privacy, which is an integral part of the right to life of citizens

is violated by the state by collecting the biometric data for the purpose of Aadhar Card.

The non-availability of Aadhar Card denies the citizens the access to the benefits under various

social welfare schemes, which is clear violation of fundamental right to equality as guaranteed

by the Constitution of Indiana.

Since the instant matter being of general public importance, calls for intervention by the SC.

1.2 The petition has been filed in public interest and therefore maintainable
as Public Interest Litigation
PIL which means “litigation in the interest of public” entered judicial process in 1970. This

type of litigation was innovated by judges to provide “equal access” to the judicial process to

those who could not come to the court for the vindication of their rights due to socio- economic

handicaps, for which there was a dire need. PIL is in fact, challenge and opportunity to undue

historical injustice done by a few to many.

PIL is absolutely necessary for maintaining rule of law, furthering the cause of justice and

accelerating the pace of realization of the constitutional objectives.

SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER 10

In Malik Bros v. Narendra Dadhich, the Apex Court clarified beyond doubt that standing in

PIL is to be judged keeping in view the purpose of petition, the purpose of petition should be

the betterment of the society and not individual benefit, so that this strategy is not allowed to

degenerate into personal, publicity or political interest litigation.

SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER 11

 2. Whether “right to privacy” is guaranteed in the Part III of

Constitution of Indiana?

It is humbly submitted before this Hon’ble Court of Indiana that the Right to Privacy has been

recognized as a fundamental right as per Article 21 of the Constitution of Indiana.

2.1 Right to Privacy guaranteed in Part III of Constitution of Indiana

1. Part III (Article 12 to 35) of the Constitution of Indiana guarantees fundamental rights

to the people of Indiana.

2. Right to privacy has been mentioned as a fundamental right in the expanded scope of

Article 21 as explained by the apex court in Unni Krishnan v. State of A.P.

3. Right to Privacy is an integral part of Right to life and Personal Liberty, and it can be

curtailed only in accordance with the “Procedure established by Law”, as provided

under Art. 21 of the Constitution of Indiana.

4. According to black’s law dictionary “right to be left alone; right of a person to be free

from any unwarranted publicity; right to live freely from any unwarranted interference

by the public in matter with which public is not necessarily concerned”

5. In R.M. Malkani v. State of Maharashtra, the Supreme Court held that the right to

privacy against telephone tapping will be protected by the court.

6. It has been observed by the Court in People’s Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of

Indiana, that any restriction on fundamental right to personal liberty can be imposed,

when there is grave danger to ‘public safety’ arising due to sudden circumstances.

7. Right to privacy not only includes our secured passwords on different social networking

sites but it includes our smallest personal information.

8. Our evolving constitutional jurisprudence on privacy rights post M.P Sharma &Others

v. Satish Chandra, District Magistrate Delhi & Others, unambiguously affirms the right

SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER 12

 to privacy as an integral part of the right to life and right to personal liberty envisaged

in the expansive interpretation of article 21.

9. The constitutional jurisprudence has also recognized the right to privacy as an ultimate

right to protect individual’s private or personal life.

SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER 13

 3. Whether the Aadhar Card Scheme is Unconstitutional and violates the

provisions of Part III of the Constitution of Indiana?

It is humbly submitted before the Hon’ble Court that the Aadhar Scheme by the government

of Indiana is unconstitutional as they are in violation of Part III of the Constitution of Indiana,

which guarantees the people certain fundamental rights.

3.1 Violation of Fundamental Rights of People

The Aadhar Scheme which was formulated as a policy by the Government of Indiana was later

converted into a legislative enactment (Act) in 2016.

It is humbly submitted not only law but even an order or notification which takes away the

fundamental rights conferred by Part III of the Constitution would be void.

3.2 Violation of Right to Privacy and Equality

1. Aadhar Card Scheme clearly violates the Right to Privacy guaranteed under Article 21

and also the Right to Equality which is guaranteed under the Constitution of Indiana.

2. The scope of article 21 is very broad and it covers every aspect of life which is required

for an individual to live a healthy and secured life. Art. 21 takes all those aspects of life

which go to make a person's life meaningful and even State can’t violate it. Article 21

protects the dignity of human life, one's personal autonomy, one’s right to privacy, etc.

3. In the instant case, the information sought under Aadhar Card Scheme is integral to

one’s personality and hence making it mandatory to provide basic and intimate

information is unconstitutional and violates the Fundamental Right to privacy.

4. In the case PUCL v. Union of Indiana, the court withheld that “the right to hold a

telephone conversation in the privacy of one’s home or office without any interference

can be claimed as right to privacy.

SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER 14

5. About 210 websites of the central and state government departments were found to be

displaying personal details and Aadhaar numbers of beneficiaries, Parliament was

informed during the monsoon session in July.

6. In R. Rajagopalan v. State of Tamil Nadu, the Supreme Court held that the right to

privacy is implicit in the right to life and liberty guaranteed to the citizens of this country

by Article 21. It is a ‘right to be let alone’. A citizen has a right to safeguard the privacy

of his own, his family, marriage, procreation, motherhood, childbearing and education

among other matters. None can publish anything concerning the above matters without

his consent – whether truthful or otherwise and whether laudatory or critical.

7. The Aadhar Card Scheme enacted by the government made Aadhar Card mandatory to

avail the benefits under various social welfare schemes and non-availability of Aadhar

Card denies the citizens the access to the benefits under various social welfare schemes.

This is neither just, fair, reasonable nor does it satisfy the requirements of Art. 14, 19

and 21 of the Constitution and therefore it is arbitrary and unreasonable amounting to

infringement of right to privacy as no such circumstances exist that justify the

restrictions imposed by the government on the exercise of right to privacy of people.

8. As per Article 19 of the constitution, all citizens have the right to freedom of speech

and expression.

9. The state by making Aadhar Cards mandatory for variety of schemes has compelled the

citizens to part with their demographic and biometric information in clear violation of

their right to remain silent. Further, there exists no reasonable ground to restrict the

right to remain silent of the people.

10. It is humbly submitted that Article 14 provides for equality before the law. However,

Aadhar scheme denies schemes to the citizens who do not avail Aadhar cards. Hence is

a clear violation of fundamental right.

SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER 15

3.3 Information sought is unreasonable

Matters concerning family, motherhood and procreation are intimate to one’s person and

should not be subject to intervention by state.

The Aadhar card scheme has been brought by the government to reduce corruption,

strengthen the security of the state and to ensure successful implementation of welfare

schemes. However, the details sought by the government for the purpose of making

Aadhar Cards and objectives of the act do not match. It fails the test of reasonable

classification.

SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER 16

 PRAYER

Wherefore, in the light of contentions presented, arguments advanced and authorities cited,
the counsel for the respondent most humbly and respectfully pray before this Honourable
Court that it may be pleased to adjudge and declare that:

I. The petition is maintainable.

II. “Right to privacy” is guaranteed in the Part III of Constitution of Indiana.
III. The Aadhar Card Scheme is Unconstitutional and violates the provisions of Part
III of the Constitution of Indiana.

And Pass any other Order, Direction, or Relief that it may deem fit in the Best Interests of

Justice, Fairness, Equity and Good Conscience.

And for this act of kindness, your lordships, respondent shall as duty bound ever humbly
pray.

Respectfully submitted

…………………………….
(Counsel for Petitioner)

SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER 17