The Supreme Court of India has reserved its judgment on two crucial Public Interest Litigations (PILs) that highlight the challenges faced by acid attack survivors and persons with blindness or low vision in completing the digital Know Your Customer (KYC) process. The case brings into focus the urgent need for inclusive policies that align with the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, and the Right to Equality (Article 14) under the Indian Constitution.
A bench comprising Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan heard the matter and directed the parties to file written submissions addressing three key points:
- Existing RBI guidelines on e-KYC.
- Deficiencies and loopholes in these guidelines.
- Recommendations for making the process more accessible.
This decision could have far-reaching implications on digital accessibility, ensuring that financial services remain inclusive for all individuals, irrespective of physical disabilities.
Background of the Case: Understanding the PILs
The Supreme Court is dealing with two specific PILs that question the accessibility of RBI’s digital KYC requirements:
1. Pragya Prasun & Ors v. Union of India (W.P.(C) No. 289/2024)
This petition seeks modifications in the digital KYC process to accommodate acid attack survivors who have suffered permanent eye disfigurement or burns. The petitioners argue that requiring a "live photograph" for verification is impractical for individuals who have severe facial injuries, making it impossible for them to complete the process.
2. Amar Jain v. Union of India (W.P.(C) No. 49/2025)
Filed by Advocate Amar Jain, who is 100% blind, this petition challenges the inaccessibility of the e-KYC process for visually impaired individuals. Some key issues raised include:
- Selfie verification requirements, which are incompatible with screen readers.
- Digital signatures using a mouse or touchscreen, which are inaccessible to blind users.
- OTP-based verification, where the short time duration makes it difficult for visually impaired individuals to complete the process.
Both petitions argue that these barriers violate the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, 2016, which mandates reasonable accommodation and accessibility in financial services.
Challenges in RBI’s Current e-KYC Guidelines
The Reserve Bank of India’s KYC Master Directions, 2016, currently govern digital identity verification for financial services, telecom providers, and government schemes. These guidelines require a live photograph for authentication, which has become a major roadblock for acid attack survivors and visually impaired individuals.
During the Supreme Court hearing, Senior Advocate V.V. Giri (representing one of the respondents) argued that blinking detection is used in digital KYC to confirm a person’s presence. However, this method is impractical for acid attack survivors with severe eye damage. As an alternative, he suggested facial movement detection.
However, petitioners contended that even this alternative remains inaccessible to many individuals, particularly those with permanent facial disfigurement or complete blindness.
Read Also:- Calcutta High Court Reviews Appeals for Death Sentence in RG Kar Hospital Rape and Murder Case
1. Violation of Fundamental Rights (Article 14 & 21)
- Right to Equality (Article 14): The petitioners argue that the lack of accessible KYC alternatives leads to systemic discrimination against persons with disabilities.
- Right to Life and Dignity (Article 21): Denying financial and telecom services due to inaccessible KYC processes violates the dignity and independence of disabled individuals.
2. Non-Compliance with the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016
- Rule 15 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Rules, 2017, requires mandatory accessibility standards in all digital services, including banking and finance.
- The petitioners argue that RBI’s current KYC guidelines only provide advisories, not enforceable accessibility measures.
3. Violation of Banking Regulation Act, 1949
As the financial regulator, the RBI has a duty to ensure that banking services remain universally accessible. The petitioners argue that the failure to accommodate persons with disabilities contradicts the spirit of financial inclusion.
4. India’s International Legal Obligations
India is a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD), which mandates equal access to financial services for persons with disabilities. The petitioners highlight that failing to implement accessible e-KYC contradicts these obligations.
Supreme Court’s Directions and Expected Impact
After hearing the arguments, the Supreme Court reserved judgment and emphasized the need for clear guidelines rather than just advisories. The Court directed the parties to submit:
- Analysis of existing RBI rules.
- Identification of loopholes.
- Suggestions for alternative KYC verification methods.
The outcome of this case is expected to reshape India’s approach to digital financial inclusion and disability rights.
1. Reforming the Digital KYC Process for Persons with Disabilities
If the ruling favors the petitioners, banks and financial institutions may be required to adopt alternative identity verification methods, such as:
- Voice recognition or biometric authentication.
- Longer OTP durations and multi-channel verification (SMS, email, voice call).
- Bank-assisted KYC verification for persons with disabilities.
2. Strengthening Disability Rights in India
A favorable ruling would reinforce the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, compelling financial institutions to comply with mandatory accessibility standards.
3. Setting a Precedent for Digital Inclusion
The case could establish a legal precedent, pushing other digital services—such as e-governance, online education, and fintech platforms—to enhance accessibility for disabled individuals.
4. Global Influence
A landmark ruling in favor of digital accessibility could inspire similar reforms in other nations struggling with digital accessibility challenges.
Read Also:- Supreme Court Quashes Workplace Harassment Case, Cites 'Attempt to Turn Civil Dispute Into Criminal Offense'
The Supreme Court’s pending judgment in Amar Jain v. Union of India and Pragya Prasun & Ors v. Union of India represents a critical moment in India’s push for digital inclusion. The case highlights the pressing need to modernize India’s digital infrastructure to ensure that persons with disabilities are not excluded from essential financial services.
If the ruling favors the petitioners, it could mark a historic victory for digital equality, compelling regulators and financial institutions to implement inclusive, accessible KYC processes. As India moves forward in its digital transformation, this case could serve as a blueprint for ensuring that no one is left behind in the journey toward financial and digital empowerment.
