What the first Aadhaar petitioner has to say about the judgment

By Justice KS Puttaswamy

The Aadhaar issue has come a long way from the time the Centre passed an executive order more than five years ago. There will be several interpretations of today’s judgment, which even I am yet to fully grasp; it is a long judgment.

Though the minority judgment by Justice Chandrachud may appear more correct, what will prevail is the majority view on the matter. Given that this is a Constitutional Bench, it is unlikely that another bench, maybe a larger one, will take another opinion.


The other option is to exercise the ‘Invalidation of Judgment’ in Parliament, which Central governments usually do not do. Even if this has to be done, it is a long, complex process.

So, whether we like it or not, we have to abide by the majority judgment, which is that Aadhaar is constitutional. I have my doubts whether this qualifies as a money bill, but if the bench has held it that way, so it shall remain. A money bill has its own definition, I am not sure if this can be passed as such a bill.

The striking down of several sections, especially 57 and 47 are welcome. I never understood why private entities could access all details.

In future, individuals or groups that are affected will need to make their cases separately. It may not be the court’s intention, but the judgment could lead to problems for many people, those cases will have to be dealt with at that time.

As things stand, we have a judgment, and that’s the final word on it for now.

The writer is a former Karnataka high court judge and lead petitioner in the case

(As told to Chethan Kumar)