The Supreme Court of India has ruled that the right to digital access is now an essential part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution. A bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan has directed the government to revise the digital Know-Your-Customer (eKYC) norms to make them accessible for persons with disabilities, especially acid attack survivors and those with visual impairment.
The Court noted that in today’s digital era, essential services like education, banking, governance, and healthcare are accessed mostly through online platforms. Excluding disabled persons from these platforms due to technical barriers violates their fundamental rights.
Read Also:- Supreme Court: In Cross-FIR Cases, Both Must Be Investigated Together-Unfair to Quash Only One
"The right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution must be re-interpreted in light of these technological realities," observed Justice Mahadevan.
The judgment stressed that digital transformation must include the marginalized, such as persons with disabilities, rural citizens, elderly people, and linguistic minorities. Many of these individuals face challenges such as lack of internet access, digital literacy, and non-accessible content. The Court said that this growing digital divide has turned into a constitutional concern, not just a policy issue.
"Bridging the digital divide is no longer a matter of policy discretion but has become a constitutional imperative," the Court highlighted.
The case was based on two writ petitions – one by acid attack survivor Pragya Prasun and another by Amar Jain, a person with 100% blindness. Both petitioners highlighted that current eKYC procedures require visual tasks such as blinking, head movement, or taking selfies, making them practically inaccessible for persons with facial or visual impairments.
Justice Mahadevan emphasized that under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, and the Constitution, persons with disabilities have a legal right to demand accessible digital systems. The Court held that acid attack victims and visually impaired persons must be provided alternative ways to complete eKYC.
"The constitutional and legal provisions confer upon the aggrieved petitioners the statutory right to demand accessibility and reasonable accommodation in the digital KYC process," said Justice Mahadevan.
Read Also:- Supreme Court Upholds Validity of Consumer Protection Act's Pecuniary Jurisdiction Rules
The petitions sought modifications to Reserve Bank of India's (RBI) 2016 KYC Master Directions. They challenged the requirement of “live photographs” and digital signatures using mouse or touch screens, which are not feasible for disabled persons. They also raised issues like short OTP time limits and complex document uploads.
The Supreme Court accepted these concerns and issued twenty directions to ensure the eKYC process is inclusive. The exact content of these directions will be known once the full judgment is uploaded.
In Amar Jain's case, the petitioner argued that the lack of accessible KYC methods denied him access to basic services like telecom, finance, and welfare schemes. His petition was tagged with that of Pragya Prasun, and both were heard together by the same bench.
Read Also:- Supreme Court Stays Delhi High Court Order to Revise CLAT-UG 2025 Merit List
The Court’s judgment is a landmark step in recognizing that digital access is not a privilege but a right, especially for the vulnerable and disabled. It calls on the State to ensure that government portals, fintech services, and e-learning platforms are universally accessible.
"The State must proactively design and implement an inclusive digital ecosystem that serves not only the privileged but also the historically excluded," the Court concluded.
Case Details: AMAR JAIN v UNION OF INDIA AND ORS., W.P.(C) No. 49/2025 & PRAGYA PRASUN VS. UNION OF INDIA W.P.(C) No. 289/ 2024
Appearances: Siddharth Luthra, Sr. Adv (Petitioner) & Ramesh Babu M. R., AOR; Ankur Sood, AOR; Brijender Chahar, A.S.G.; (Respondents) [Pragya's petition] & Advocate Ila Sheel [for Amar's petition]
