The Centre has stated that Shamnad Basheer’s Delhi HC petition in search of damages due to Aadhaar statistics leaks is non-maintainable because the Supreme Court has already passed its judgment on the Aadhaar count. Basheer is the founder of SpicyIP and a legal professional. However, Basheer said that the SC had especially stated that it becomes not coping with the problems raised in his petition. In the KS Puttaswamy judgment, the SC had cited that, “Section 43A of the IT Act attaches liability to a body corporate, that is owning, managing and dealing with any 68A venture to the Aadhaar mission for violation of IT Act and Rules has been filed within the Delhi High Court within the be counted of Shamnad Basheer v UIDAI and Ors. Therefore, we are not managing this factor, nor does it rise for attention in those lawsuits.
Apart from claiming that the petition was non-maintainable, the Centre argued that the petition turned out of place and was primarily based on unverified reports. The Centre stated: The petition is based totally on “unsubstantiated” alleged statistics and “grossly misreported and interpolated” data regarding Aadhaar
It denied allegations of any protection breach of the UIDAI’s or the CIDR’s biometric database, stating that Basheer’s allegations that his privacy changed into impacted were based on press reviews “without even verifying as to whether his records turned into in any respect compromised.” “It is strongly denied that any records breach has befallen within the CIDR or that the petitioner’s right has been affected in any way by any means,” the Centre’s affidavit said.
Demanded the rejection of the PIL
The Centre further went on to assert the importance and application of Aadhaar for the delivery of services. It demanded that Basheer present “the strictest proof” in evidence that his non-public information becomes compromised or is beneath risk or being made insecure. It demanded that the petition is rejected, claiming that its existing controls and protocols are prepared to counter any attacks. Basheer filed his petition in May 2018 in the Delhi HC, alleging a violation of privacy guaranteed through the KS Puttaswamy judgment. He sought movement against the UIDAI and the Union authorities for being negligent in securing citizens’ Aadhaar facts.
Basheer demanded exemplary damages for the Aadhaar facts breaches, the supply to opt-out of Aadhaar, and that everyone presents Aadhaar statistics be deleted via Write of Mandamus. In November 2018, the Delhi HC granted the UIDAI 4 weeks to file a response to the petition and published the following hearing for February 14. Earlier in August, the court docket had given more time to the UIDAI and different government bodies because the final judgment within the Aadhaar is counted become looming on time.
In his PIL, Basheer elaborates that he signed up for an Aadhaar Card in 2015, believing the task to be secure, comfy, and consent-based totally. He later also linked his financial institution account with Aadhaar for fear of his account being suspended. However, his petition notes that he learned through news reports that the security of the Aadhaar database was compromised a couple of times. The Petitioner fears that his treasured records (as also that of limitless other Aadhaaris) are in the illegal ownership of unauthorized third parties, who can, at any time, misuse it for their very own non-public benefit.
This worry isn’t always just a theoretical one, however, one that has played out in the beyond. The PIL claimed that the security breaches have been due to the “negligence/willful recklessness” of the UIDAI in the absence of good enough security measures and brought on breaches and/or compromise of the statistics Aadhaar holders. Asserts that such behavior violates that Aadhaar Act and the IT Act, 2000 and Rules – violating Basheer’s right to privacy below the charter The petition argues that the UIDAI and Centre are at risk of compensating Aadhaar holders for protection breaches under Section 43A of the IT Act, considering that their negligence in handling non-public facts and records has induced “wrongful loss or wrongful gain to people.”
Basheer, in his petition, in addition, demands:
Information on the number of information breaches of Aadhaar, searching for information about the scope and specific approaches wherein information became compromised An independent investigative/audit committee to investigate all Aadhaar breaches, and the adequacy of the existing protection architecture