Back
J. B. PARDIWALA, R. MAHADEVAN
Pragya Prasun – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
Question 1?
Key Points: - The judgment holds that digital KYC processes must be accessible to persons with disabilities and compliant with RPwD Act, 2016 and Article 21 (Paras 14-18) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) - It directs adoption of reasonable accommodations and alternative methods for KYC, including live photo/live verification alternatives (Paras 15, 16, 18) (!) (!) (!) - It lays down directives for accessibility standards, audits, and shared guidelines among regulators and regulated entities (Directives (!) - (!) ) - It references the need to interpret Article 21 in digital context and bridge digital divide in access to services (Paras 17, 241) - It notes various regulatory frameworks (RPwD Act, RPwD Rules, WCAG/GIGW) and role of RBI, DoT, SEBI, PFRDA in ensuring accessible digital KYC (Paras 12-13, 99-103, 121-125)
JUDGMENT :
R. MAHADEVAN, J.
1. Since the issues involved in both the writ petitions are common, interlinked, and similar, they were heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment.
2. Technology has played a transformative role in reshaping India’s economy and governance. Initiatives such as Digital India aim to promote efficiency, transparency, and accessibility through digital means. Central to this transformation has been the creation of a robust digital infrastructure, including the Aadhaar program, online KYC mechanisms, and various electronic service delivery platforms. However, amidst this wave of digital progress, there remains a crucial and often overlooked aspect that demands urgent attention – ensuring that digital infrastructure and services are accessible to all, including persons with disabilities and other marginalised groups. True inclusion requires that technological advancements accommodate the diverse needs of all citizens, thereby fostering an environment where no individual is left behind. With this preface, we now proceed to examine the key issues involved in the cases before us.
3. While the petitioners in W.P(C) No.289 of 2024 are acid attack victims,
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
