New Delhi:
The Supreme Court’s landmark decision, emphasizing that digital access is internal for the right to life, follows a long legal battle under the leadership of an acid attack survivor, whose inability to nap became a barrier in opening a bank account in its name.
In July 2023, acid attack Survivor Pragya Prasun went to an ICICI Bank branch to open a bank account. She could not complete the Digital KYC process as the bank employees stressed that she should nap her eyes to meet the need for a “live photograph”.
Due to injuries in acid attack, Pragya Prasoon did not blink an eye. He was told that the mandatory requirement of the customer’s ‘Livinel’ under the Reserve Bank of India can be met only when a customer blinks his eyes before the camera and it can coincide with the picture.
Pragya Prasun later raised the issue on social media, which resented. Later, a bank executive approached him and told him that he could create an exception to him. But for Pragya Prasoon, this was not enough. He realized that he continued to face such problems and decided to go to court.
While trying to buy a SIM card, Pragya Prasun faced the same problem. She was asked to blink and she could not. He eventually had to buy a SIM card in the name of his spouse.
“Inspired by such anger and insult, petitioner No. 1 took up on social media and launched an online campaign, titled” #IWONTBLINK “, to raise awareness about non-cooperative policy, to compulsory Digital KYC/E-KYC process that fails to meet the needs of disabled and the symbols, and his lawyer says Ninuja.
Pragya Prasun’s petition was clubbed with similar petitions by people struggling to clean KYC verification due to visual problems.
Nearly two years after Pragya Prasun’s annoying experience in the bank, the Supreme Court today ruled that digital access is a fundamental right and directed the Center to reduce the Jan-Khai-Castomer (KYC) process for people with visual or facial loss.
The court said, “The right to digital access is an internal component of the right to life under Article 21.” “We have held that the KYC processes need a change in the KYC processes. We have given 20 directions. Petitioners who suffer from acid attacks and blindness have been unable to complete the KYC process … Due to facial disintegration. Economic opportunities etc. are through digital (access) Article 21 is required to re -interpret such technology and said the digital division.”
“Digital partitions, digital infrastructure, are characterized by uneven access to skills and materials, not only disabled individuals, but continuing systematic exclusion of large sections of rural population, senior citizens, economically weaker communities and linguistic minorities,” said Justice JB Padiwala and Justice R Mahadevan.
The Supreme Court stressed that it was the state’s responsibility to design an inclusive digital ecosystem which is accessible to all, including people from marginalized and weaker sections.
The court said that many welfare schemes of the government, including people associated with healthcare, now rely on digital infrastructure and have made digital divide necessary to ensure a dignified life. The apex court said that all government portals, learning platforms and financial technology services should be accessible to all.
