New Delhi, September 26: While the majority judgment in the Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld the Constitutional validity of the Aadhaar Act, one of the judges dissented completely. Justice DY Chandrachud, one of the judges on the 5-judge bench hearing the Aadhaar matter, gave a judgment in contrast with the majority verdict given by Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra, Justice AM Khanwilkar and Justice AK Sikri. Justice Chandrachud in his draft of the judgment completely struck down Aadhaar, holding it Unconstitutional. Aadhaar Declared Constitutionally Valid by Supreme Court, But It's Not Mandatory to Link it With Bank Accounts, Mobile Numbers.

Justice Chandrachud said that the passing of the Aadhaar Act as Money bill was a "fraud on the Constitution," adding that it does not qualify and violates the basic structure. Supreme Court verdict on Aadhaar: As it happened.

Calling it a violation of Right to Privacy, Justice Chandrachud said, "Constitutional guarantees cannot be left to risks posed by technological advancements." He added that allowing private players to use Aadhaar would lead to profiling, which could be used in ascertaining political views etc of citizens. Highlights of Aadhaar Verdict

Justice Chandrachud also came down heavily on the Centre for passing notifications on Aadhaar in violation of interim orders of the Supreme Court. "Propriety demands that Centre should have approached this Court for a variation of its orders," said Justice Chandrachud in his judgment.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld the Constitutional Validity of the Aadhaar Act and struck down certain sections including Section 57 and 22(2). While Justice Sikri, CJI Misra and Justice Khanwilkar held one view, Justice Chandrachud dissented and Justice Bhushan didn't agree to three points in the majority verdict.

"Benefits and services under Section 7 should be of the nature of welfare schemes targeted at a particular deprived community," the court said, adding that the CBSE NEET etc cannot mandate Aadhaar and that it also cannot be made compulsory in schools.

Another important point made by the court was that bank accounts did not need to be linked with Aadhaar and that corporates had no right to ask for your UIDAI number. The court upheld Section 139AA mandating linkage with PAN, adding it was a must for Income Tax returns.

(The above story first appeared on LatestLY on Sep 26, 2018 01:19 PM IST. For more news and updates on politics, world, sports, entertainment and lifestyle, log on to our website latestly.com).