A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been moved before the Supreme Court seeking a radical shift in how Aadhaar cards are issued in India. The petition demands that the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) restrict the issuance of new Aadhaar cards only to children up to the age of six, while implementing “stringent guidelines” for any adult or adolescent seeking the 12-digit identification number.
The plea, filed by lawyer Ashwini Upadhyay through advocate Ashwani Dubey, contends that current verification processes are “weak and easily manipulated,” allowing infiltrators to masquerade as Indian citizens and gain access to essential government documents and welfare schemes.
The petitioner argues that while Aadhaar was originally intended strictly as a “proof of identity,” it has evolved into a “foundational document.” This status, according to the plea, enables individuals to bypass more rigorous checks to obtain other critical identification, such as ration cards, domicile certificates, and voter IDs.
The PIL specifically highlights a loophole where “foreigners apply for Aadhaar under the ‘foreign’ category,” but “infiltrators apply under the ‘Indian citizen’ category and get it easily made.” Once obtained, the petition claims these individuals become “indistinguishable” from genuine citizens, potentially distorting democratic processes and undermining national security.
With approximately 144 crore Aadhaar cards already issued—covering 99 percent of the Indian population—the petitioner argues there is no longer a need for a liberal issuance policy for adults. The plea seeks the following directions:
- Age Restriction: Limit the issuance of new Aadhaar cards to children aged 0-6 years.
- Stringent Verification: Frame new, rigorous guidelines for any adolescents or adults who have not yet been enrolled.
- Public Awareness: Mandate display boards at all Common Service Centres (CSCs) clarifying that Aadhaar is “proof of identity” only, and not proof of citizenship, address, or date of birth.
The petition invokes Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution, arguing that the alleged misuse of Aadhaar leads to a diversion of public resources and undermines targeted welfare delivery.
A central legal question raised in the plea is whether the Aadhaar Act 2016 has become “temporally unreasonable.” The petitioner suggests the law has failed to keep pace with the legislative intent of maintaining a clear distinction between foreigners and Indian citizens in the context of evolving security challenges.
The plea has named the UIDAI, along with the Union Ministries of Home Affairs, Law and Justice, and Electronics and Information Technology, as parties to the case. All states and Union Territories have also been included as respondents.
