Inclusive Digital Access is Part of Article 21: Supreme Court Judgment

1. In the landmark case Amar Jain v. Union of India and Others, the Supreme Court has expanded the scope of Article 21.
2. The Court ruled that inclusive and meaningful digital access is a fundamental right under the Right to Life and Liberty.

Key Highlights of the Judgment:

1. The Court emphasized that digital access must be inclusive, meaningful, and equitable for all individuals.
2. It recognised the Right to Digital Access as an instinctive and essential part of the Right to Life under Article 21.
3. The State's responsibility to ensure digital inclusion stems from Article 21 (Right to Life), Article 14 (Equality before law), Article 15 (Prohibition of discrimination), and Article 38 (Social Justice obligation).
4. The Court invoked the principle of substantive equality, stressing that digital transformation must ensure fairness and inclusiveness.
5. Directed the authorities to revise existing Know-Your-Customer (KYC) norms for banking and e-governance access.
6. The revised digital KYC must be accessible to individuals with facial disfiguration (e.g., acid attack survivors) and persons with visual impairments.
7. These directions were issued under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.
8. A total of 20 specific directions were issued by the Court to make the eKYC process more accessible and inclusive.

Significance of Inclusive Digital Access:

1. Enables equal access to government welfare schemes and e-governance services.
2. Helps in bridging the rural-urban digital divide.
3. Ensures access to online education platforms and financial technology services.
4. Empowers marginalised and vulnerable groups to participate in the mainstream development process.
5. Reinforces the idea that digital accessibility is a critical enabler of constitutional rights and dignity.

Relevant Supreme Court Judgments on Internet and Digital Rights: Sabu Mathew George v. Union of India (2017): Directed search engines to block advertisements related to pre-natal sex determination. Clarified that this does not curtail the right to access information or freedom of expression. Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020): Recognised that access to the internet is essential for exercising the right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a). Upheld that internet access is integral to the right to trade and occupation under Article 19(1)(g).

 

Also Read
Public Administration Optional	UPSC Daily Current Affairs
UPSC Monthly Magazine	Question Answer Practice For UPSC
Free MCQs for UPSC Prelims	UPSC Test Series
ENSURE IAS NOTES	Our Booklist