Supreme Court seeks Centre, States’ response on plea over ‘misuse’ of Aadhaar as proof of citizenship

The Supreme Court, through a bench of the Chief Justice and Justice V. Mohana, has issued notices to the Central Government, all states, and Union Territorie...

What Happened

The Supreme Court, through a bench of the Chief Justice and Justice V. Mohana, has issued notices to the Central Government, all states, and Union Territories seeking their response to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that challenges the widespread use of Aadhaar cards as proof of citizenship, domicile, and date of birth.
The petition contends that despite Section 9 of the Aadhaar Act, 2016 explicitly stating that Aadhaar does not constitute proof of citizenship or domicile, the document is routinely accepted as such in school admissions, property registrations, voter registration, ration card issuance, and driving licence applications.
The PIL raises the concern that the gap between the legal definition of Aadhaar and its ground-level use has been exploited by unauthorised individuals to access official documents and public benefits they are not entitled to.
The matter has been tagged with similar pending petitions before the Court.
The Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) had previously issued a formal clarification in August 2023 reiterating that Aadhaar is solely a proof of identity — not citizenship, permanent address, or date of birth.

Static Topic Bridges

Aadhaar Act 2016: Statutory Framework and Key Provisions

The Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016 is the statutory basis for India's biometric identity system. It was passed as a Money Bill (a characterisation that itself became contested in the Puttaswamy judgment). The Act established the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) as a statutory body (prior to the Act, UIDAI functioned under a Planning Commission executive order). Key provisions: Section 2 defines core terms including "Aadhaar number," "biometric data," and "demographic information"; Section 7 allows the government to require Aadhaar for delivery of subsidies and benefits funded from the Consolidated Fund of India; Section 9 categorically states that the Aadhaar number shall not be used as proof of citizenship or domicile; Section 29 restricts disclosure of identity information.

Aadhaar Act 2016: passed as Money Bill under Article 110
UIDAI: statutory body under the Act; earlier set up by executive order under Planning Commission (2009)
Section 9: Aadhaar number not to be deemed proof of citizenship or domicile — explicit statutory bar
Section 7: mandatory Aadhaar for welfare benefits funded from Consolidated Fund of India
Section 29: restrictions on sharing/publishing biometric and identity data
As of 2024, over 1.4 billion Aadhaar numbers have been issued; Aadhaar is issued to residents (not citizens exclusively)

Connection to this news: The legal foundation of the petitioners' argument rests directly on Section 9 — the statutory text is unambiguous, yet administrative practice has diverged from the legal mandate.

Puttaswamy Judgment (2017 and 2018): Privacy and Aadhaar's Constitutionality

The Puttaswamy case produced two landmark Supreme Court judgments. The first (2017, 9-judge Constitution Bench) unanimously declared the right to privacy a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution, overruling earlier decisions in M.P. Sharma (1958) and Kharak Singh (1963). The Court held that privacy is intrinsic to life and personal liberty under Article 21, and also flows from Articles 14 and 19. The second judgment (2018, 5-judge bench, 4:1 majority) upheld the constitutional validity of the Aadhaar Act but struck down several provisions: it held that requiring Aadhaar for private sector services (banks, telecom) was unconstitutional; it read down provisions allowing CIDR data sharing with agencies; it held the Aadhaar Act should not have been passed as a Money Bill.

Puttaswamy I (2017): 9-judge bench; unanimous; right to privacy = fundamental right under Article 21
Puttaswamy II (2018): 4:1 majority upheld Aadhaar Act; struck down: mandatory Aadhaar for private services, certain CIDR data-sharing clauses
Article 21: "No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law"
The 2018 ruling required stronger data protection legislation — leading eventually to the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023
Key test for privacy limitations: legitimate state aim + proportionality + procedural guarantees

Connection to this news: The current petition does not challenge the Aadhaar system itself but its administrative misuse — precisely the kind of disproportionate application that the Puttaswamy framework requires to be guarded against.

Aadhaar, Citizenship, and the NRC/NPR Distinction

A critical and frequently confused distinction: Aadhaar is issued to all residents of India regardless of citizenship status. It establishes identity (who you are) and residence — not nationality. The National Population Register (NPR) is a register of usual residents of India compiled under the Citizenship Act, 1955 and Citizenship (Registration of Citizens and Issue of National Identity Cards) Rules, 2003. The National Register of Citizens (NRC), completed in Assam, is a register of Indian citizens. These are distinct instruments with different legal bases. The Election Commission has consistently stated — including in the Supreme Court during the Bihar Special Intensive Revision controversy — that Aadhaar is not proof of citizenship and cannot be the basis for voter registration or deletion.

Aadhaar: issued to all residents (citizens + non-citizens); proof of identity only
NPR: register of usual residents; based on Citizenship Act 1955 and 2003 Rules; does NOT confer citizenship
NRC (Assam): register of Indian citizens; based on Citizenship Act 1955 and Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act 1950
Citizenship Act 1955: primary legislation; defines citizenship by birth, descent, registration, naturalisation
Article 5–11 of Constitution: original citizenship provisions; Parliament empowered under Article 11 to regulate by law
Foreigners Act 1946: primary law for detection and deportation of illegal migrants

Connection to this news: The petition highlights that the gap between Aadhaar's legal status as an identity document and its administrative use as a citizenship document creates a systemic vulnerability — but the solution must be found in better administrative compliance with existing law, not in any assumption that Aadhaar holders have established citizenship.

Key Facts & Data

Aadhaar Act 2016: Section 9 explicitly bars use as proof of citizenship or domicile
UIDAI formal clarification (August 2023): Aadhaar validates identity only — not citizenship, address, or date of birth
Puttaswamy I (2017): 9-judge bench unanimously recognised right to privacy under Article 21
Puttaswamy II (2018): 4:1 upheld Aadhaar Act; struck down mandatory Aadhaar for private sector services
UIDAI: statutory body established under Aadhaar Act 2016; earlier operational under Planning Commission executive order (2009)
Over 1.4 billion Aadhaar numbers issued (as of 2024); issued to residents, not exclusively citizens
SC bench: Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice V. Mohana; notices issued to Centre, all states, UTs, and Election Commission
Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023: enacted in follow-up to Puttaswamy II's requirement for stronger data protection law