Justice DY Chandrachud said there were many judgments of the Supreme Court that concluded that a mere possibility of misuse could not lead to striking down of a legislation.
“The mere possibility of the misuse of a legislation cannot be the ground to strike it down as unconstitutional”, remarked Justice Chandrachud.
“The constitutional validity of a statute has to be adjudicated generally and not on the basis of particular instances”, said Justice Chandrachud.
“How does the Court determine what extent of power conferred by the statute poses a risk? Does this question even fall within the Court’s jurisdiction or is it for the legislature to decide?”, inquired Justice Chandrachud.
A five-judge Constitution bench, headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra, was hearing a clutch of petitions that challenge the constitutional validity of the government’s biometric identification programme.
He added that for the court to strike down a law, it must be established that the legislation is a colourable one. A colourable legislation is when the legislature indirectly enacts a law it is not allowed to do within the constraints of the Constitution.
Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for one of the petitioners, replied that Aadhaar law is an exception to these judgments as it was already being misused.
Kapil Sibal, arguing against Aadhaar law, said that Aadhaar is the government's right to information on citizens and it can use such power for anything.