PIL Filed in Supreme Court Seeking Ban on Using Aadhaar as Proof of Citizenship or DOB

A Public Interest Litigation has been moved in the Supreme Court seeking directions to the Union government, state governments and the Election Commission of India to restrict the use of Aadhaar strictly to identity verification, and not treat it as proof of citizenship, domicile, residential address or date of birth for any official purpose, ANI reported.

The petition, filed by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay under Article 32 of the Constitution, asks the court to declare that accepting Aadhaar as proof of date of birth and residence in Form 6 for new voter registration is contrary to Section 9 of the Aadhaar Act, Section 23(4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, and Article 14, and therefore "void and inoperative."

Legal challenge over Aadhaar and voter registration rules

According to the plea, Section 9 of the Aadhaar Act clearly states that Aadhaar is not evidence of citizenship or domicile, and a UIDAI notification dated August 22, 2023 clarifies that Aadhaar serves only as proof of identity and not as proof of citizenship, address or date of birth, creating an alleged conflict with current electoral enrolment practices.

The petitioner argues that this statutory framework is being diluted in practice, as Aadhaar is widely relied on for processes where citizenship, residence or age are crucial, including school admissions, voter registration, ration cards, driving licences and property purchases, which, according to the plea, exposes public systems to misuse and undermines the intended legal safeguards.

Supreme Court PIL on Aadhaar documents and electoral data

The PIL focuses on Form-6 under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, which presently allows applicants to attach Aadhaar as proof of both date of birth and residence, a provision that the petition describes as inconsistent with the Aadhaar Act and with instructions issued by UIDAI, because those instruments restrict Aadhaar to identity confirmation alone.

To highlight the alleged inconsistency, the plea places statutory provisions and notifications side by side, stressing that the legal position has already been clarified but is not followed in designing voter enrolment documents and related procedures.

The petition claims that infiltrators and illegal immigrants are allegedly obtaining Aadhaar numbers through weak verification procedures and then using those Aadhaar details as a foundational document to secure other identity papers, including voter identity cards, which, the plea says, affects the distribution of welfare benefits and weakens the integrity of the electoral roll.

Relying on judicial pronouncements, the PIL cites several Supreme Court and High Court decisions to contend that Aadhaar cannot be treated as conclusive proof of age, and argues that treating it as such for voter registration contradicts those rulings as well as the specific framework established under election laws and the Aadhaar legislation.

The petition also invokes Articles 14, 19, 21, 29, 326, 327 and 355 of the Constitution, contending that illegal infiltration has a direct bearing on electoral integrity, demographic balance, welfare schemes and national security, and refers extensively to the judgement in Sarbananda Sonowal v. Union of India, where large-scale illegal migration was described as "external aggression and internal disturbance."

Among other directions, the petitioner urges the Supreme Court to instruct all concerned authorities that Aadhaar must be accepted only as proof of identity, strictly following the "spirit of Section 9 of the Aadhaar Act 2016 and UIDAI Notification dated August 22, 2023", framing the case as an attempt to align administrative practice with existing statutory and constitutional provisions.

With inputs from agency