Story so far: On April 30, the Supreme Court (SC) directed an amendment to ensure accessibility of “Persons with Disabilities” (PWD) (PWD) to reinterpret Article 21 of the Constitution to cover “digital access.”
What laws protect PWD rights?
The Constitution, through its preamble, fundamental rights and directive principles, and disability regulations, imposes the State on the obligation to adapt to laws, policies and infrastructure that enables the PWD to exercise its rights equally with others. Promoting these assurances and conferring the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD), India enacted the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPWD) Act 2016, which adopts a “social-level” approach that defines disability as disability arising from obstacles, as well as mental, intellectual, social, social, social and mental disorders, allowing full participation in a comprehensive society.
Crucially, Article 42 of the RPWD Act 2016 provides for “governmental measures” to ensure access to all audio, printing and electronic media; the electronic media includes audio descriptions, symbolic language interpretations and titles; and everyday electronic products and equipment that follow the “universal design” principle.
Are KYC details mandatory?
To curb illicit finance and money laundering, the Money Laundering Act 2002 (and its 2005 rules) requires each bank and financial institution to verify the identity of the client, maintain a comprehensive record and report relevant information to the financial intelligence department. Therefore, digital KYC verification is essential for a variety of basic services – from opening a bank, demat or trading account to accessing a SIM card, a pension plan or an insurance policy. It can also free government welfare – from national scholarships to “direct welfare transfers” associated with Aadhaar.
Based on this task, the 2016 Master Guidance Know Your Customer (KYC) Rules from the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) stipulates the Client Due Diligence (CDD) framework and introduces a video-based customer identification process (V-CIP) through Article 18 to enable remote customer verification through secure live video interactions. Customers can prove their identity online by clicking on a selfie; signing physically or digitally; printing and revoking, or clicking on a photo that fills the form; verifying OTP in 30 seconds; and reading random codes flashing on the screen.
How does it affect PWD?
Acid attack survivors leave permanent “face disfigure” and severe eye burns, and people with total blindness or low vision – a written petition has been filed to seek guidance from respondents, including RBI, including telecom and SEBI, to allow alternative damage to remote digital kyc and video ranges to allow remote inspections to make them remotely unreachable to all PRES, while remotely enjoy the remote prects and precs and the PRED. frame.
Currently, each “regulated entity” must design its own test. Methods such as flashing, reading the flashing code or writing down and taking selfies do not include blind users. Although explicitly authorized in the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) accessibility standards for 2021 and 2022, most KYC applications and websites can use them – there is no screen reader prompting camera alignment, no audio prompts for lighting or focus, and no way to distinguish the sides of the document during uploading. Additionally, users with vision impaired eyes usually use thumb impressions that are not accepted as valid signatures and will not issue them with PAN cards. Aadhaar-based biometric system worsens exclusion. Scanners and interfaces lack basic “accessibility” features such as “text to voice” or “self-verification”. As a result, blind applicants are often required to appear in person or refuse with vague technical reasons. The RBI master note also prohibits any form of “tip” during KYC verification, thus leaving the user helpless.
How does SC intervene?
SC has always believed that the accessibility of PWD is a “constitutional order.” exist Rajive Raturi and India Alliance (2024), it ruled that “accessibility” is at the heart of Article 21’s right to life, dignity and freedom of movement. During the COVID-19-19-19-19 vaccination drive, the court stressed the need for full access to digital registration to prevent exclusion. In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that the “digital barrier” blatantly violated the PWD rights under UNCRPD and India’s disability laws. It is based on the principle of “substantive equality” and indicates that the digital KYC guide is centered on “accessibility”. It marks that the digital divide will not only affect PWD, but also rural users, seniors, economic disadvantage and language minorities.
The court relies on Articles 14, 15, 21 and 38 to confirm that the “digital channel” is inseparable from the “right to life and freedom”. It requires the state to ensure that all digital infrastructure is accessible, especially for marginalized communities.
Kartikey Singh is a lawyer based in New Delhi.
publishing – May 16, 2025 at 08:30 AM IST
