top of page

Case Analysis On Justice KS Puttaswamy [Retired] Vs Union Of India And Ors




Arsh Mishra, Kalinga University Naya Raipur

NAME OF THE CASE: - Justice K.S. Puttaswamy[retired] vs. Union of India and ors.2017


CITATION:- Writ Petition [Civil] NO. 494 Of 2012,[2017] 10 SCC 1

INTRODUCTION:

“It’s better to be unique than the best, being the best makes you the number one, but being unique makes you the only one “ that’s the message government want to send through Aadhaar as it is described as the unique identity, and the authority which enroll a person and at behest the aadhaar card issue is known as unique identification authority of India. Aadhaar act was passed in 2016. The main purpose to introduce this act was to ensure that all the citizens should receive proper benefits and subsidies by the Government. The Supreme Court of India upheld the aadaar act and stuck down the provision of Act which was unconstitutional.

It was held that Right to privacy is a fundamental right under article 14,19 and 21 of the Indian constitution. The case of Justice K.S. Puttaswamy [retired] vs. Union of India and ors. Become the foundation of the “Right to privacy” jurisprudence in India.

Recent Posts

See All

Kommentare


Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research

Abbreviation: IJLLR

ISSN: 2582-8878

Website: www.ijllr.com

Accessibility: Open Access

License: Creative Commons 4.0

Submit Manuscript: Click here

Licensing: 

 

All research articles published in The Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research are fully open access. i.e. immediately freely available to read, download and share. Articles are published under the terms of a Creative Commons license which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

 

Disclaimer:

The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of the IJLLR or its members. The designations employed in this publication and the presentation of material therein do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the IJLLR.

bottom of page